DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communication(s) filed on 17 October 2025.
Claim(s) 4, 7-8, 16, 18-20 and 26 is/are cancelled.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 10, 12, 14 and 17 is/are amended.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 9-15, 17 and 21-25 is/are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. §103
Applicant argues that Liu does not disclose the claimed edge node operations. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Being performed at an edge node or collecting from an edge node is equivalent to those operations happening at a secondary remote site. Herndon already discloses local and remote operations. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074]. Therefore the only gap to fill is that the transaction data is generated by the edge node (emphasis added). The tax data being generated by the edge node is extraordinarily broad and includes any data originating from or created by another entity which Liu clearly shows that the tax data comes from each respective entity. This is clearly shown on page 6 when describing that the information is of each entity and such information may include the enterprise’s CAT data and detailed data information of goods. Liu clearly discloses that the data is generated by the edge node.
Applicant argues that Herndon does not disclose the incorporated elements of Claim 26. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Serialization is extraordinarily broad and can include any data conversion that can be stored and transmitted across networks and then reconstructed which includes the data standardization and transmission disclosed by Herndon. Herndon discloses standardization into objects and submission to remote tax engine. See at least paragraphs [0074] and [0078]-[0088]. Examiner has additionally included the above citation to improve clarity of the reference. Thus Herndon discloses the claimed limitation.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner notes the phrases “…to reduce a network delay or a network latency” recited in Claim 24 and “…to offload accumulated transaction data” recited in Claim 25 recite non-functional intended use and may be afforded no patentable weight.
Examiner notes a database pod is functionally equivalent to a unit of database storage.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 9-11, 28 and 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herndon et al. (US 2016/0042466 A1 hereinafter Herndon) in view of Lam et al. (US 2020/0275394 A1 hereinafter Lam) further in view of Liu et al. (CN 112241914 A hereinafter Liu; examiner notes page numbers are those of the machine translation).
Claim 1
A method for local and cloud-based tax determination operations, the method comprising: (Herndon discloses a system and method for tax collection and compliance which may be implemented locally, in the cloud or a combination of both. See at least paragraphs [0020]-[0021], [0074], [0088], [0096] and Fig. 8.)
obtaining, at a transaction system, transaction data associated with one or more transactions, the transaction data is obtained from a representational state transfer (REST) endpoint exposed by a local container orchestration accessed by a cloud sync server, exposing the REST endpoint enables operations between the local container orchestration and a transaction sync service, the transaction data is generated by an edge node of the transaction system; (Herndon discloses obtaining transaction data at vendors (i.e. transaction systems). See at least paragraphs [0020]-[0024]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074]. Herndon discloses Instructions to apply the determined deduction to electronic transactions associated with the at least one vendor are provided at 305. The instructions (i.e. equivalent in function to a REST endpoint) may be provided by the deduction calculation engine 220 of the collection and analysis system 140 to one or more of the electronic payment processors 120. The instructions are executory in nature and may direct that the relevant electronic payment processors 120 deduct the specified amounts or percentages from the transactions prior to settlement with the vendors. The instructions may further direct the electronic payment processors 120 to send the monies to accounts controlled by the tax authority 110 and/or its agents. See at least paragraph [0057].
Although Herndon does disclose the method of Claim 1, they might not explicitly disclose all the features of incorporated Claim 7. Liu teaches generating the transaction data at an edge node of the transaction system, and wherein the edge node executes the local tax engine. See at least the abstract and pages 4, 6 and 15.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement edge computing as taught by Liu in the system of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
executing, at the edge node of the transaction system, a local tax engine based on the transaction data to generate tax data representing one or more tax values associated with the one or more transactions; (Herndon discloses providing tax analysis services based on transaction data and calculating deductions based on jurisdiction. See at least paragraphs [0024]-[0025], [0031], [0036]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074]. Being performed at an edge node is taught by the combination with Liu as shown above.)
sending, by the transaction system, the tax data to a cloud-based tax management and reporting system that is remote to the transaction system; (Herndon discloses tax analysis system disclosing determining deductions, audit reports, and a variety of reports based on vendor parameters. See at least paragraphs [0026], [0048], [0050]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074].)
receiving, at the transaction system, an entity level report from the cloud-based tax management and reporting system, the entity level report based at least in part on the tax data; (Herndon discloses tax analysis system disclosing determining deductions, audit reports, and a variety of reports based on vendor parameters. See at least paragraphs [0026], [0048], [0050]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074].)
scheduling a synchronization for the local tax engine at a synchronization time selected based on an amount of network traffic such that the synchronization time is an off-peak network time; (Although Herndon does disclose uploading of tax data, they might not explicitly disclose synchronizing during off-peak network time. Lam teaches synchronizing client devices to a cloud server during off-peak network time and deleting local data after successful synchronization. See at least paragraphs [0062], [0067] and Fig. 6.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because Lam additionally teaches the motivation that this provides for effective and efficient data communication and synchronization. See at least paragraph [0010].
Also It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
performing the synchronization, at the synchronization time and using the transaction sync service exposed by the REST endpoint, between the local tax engine and a remote tax engine of the cloud-based tax management reporting system; (Although Herndon does disclose uploading of tax data, they might not explicitly disclose synchronizing during off-peak network time. Lam teaches synchronizing client devices to a cloud server during off-peak network time and deleting local data after successful synchronization. See at least paragraphs [0062], [0067] and Fig. 6.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because Lam additionally teaches the motivation that this provides for effective and efficient data communication and synchronization. See at least paragraph [0010].
Also It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
receiving a response from the transaction sync service, the response including a hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) status code indicating a successful synchronization; and (Herndon teaches web page implementation (i.e. http implementation). See at least paragraph [0049]. Although Herndon does disclose uploading of tax data, they might not explicitly disclose synchronizing during off-peak network time. Lam teaches synchronizing client devices to a cloud server during off-peak network time and deleting local data after successful synchronization. See at least paragraphs [0062], [0067] and Fig. 6.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because Lam additionally teaches the motivation that this provides for effective and efficient data communication and synchronization. See at least paragraph [0010].
Also It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
removing an object file of the transaction data from a database of the local tax engine in response to the HTTP status code. (Although Herndon does disclose uploading of tax data, they might not explicitly disclose synchronizing during off-peak network time. Lam teaches synchronizing client devices to a cloud server during off-peak network time and deleting local data after successful synchronization. See at least paragraphs [0062], [0067] and Fig. 6.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because Lam additionally teaches the motivation that this provides for effective and efficient data communication and synchronization. See at least paragraph [0010].
Also It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
Claim 6
The method of claim 1, wherein the local tax engine includes an executable software package that includes one or more tax libraries, one or more entity-specific parameter libraries, one or more user credentials, or a combination thereof. (Herndon discloses instructions to apply the determined deduction to electronic transactions associated with the at least one vendor (i.e. entity-specific parameter libraries) are provided by the calculation engine of the collection and analysis system to one or more of the electronic payment processors. See at least paragraph [0057].)
Claim 9
A system for local and cloud-based tax determination operations, the system comprising:
a memory; and (Herndon discloses computer system including memory. See at least paragraphs [0074]-[0075] and Fig. 6)
one or more processors communicatively coupled to the memory, the one or more processors configured to: (Herndon discloses computer system including processing devices and units coupled to the memory. See at least paragraphs [0074]-[0075] and Fig. 6)
…
keep the transaction data in a local store; (Herndon discloses storage may be implemented locally. See at least paragraphs [0073]-[0074].)
…
The remainder of Claim 9 is substantially similar to or broader than the corresponding elements in Claim 1 and is therefore rejected using similar reasoning.
Claim 10
The system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive serialized invoice objects at a transaction sync client from the local tax engine; (Herndon discloses the collection and analysis system includes an audit and compliance engine, which can identify underreporting or non-reporting by a vendor (i.e. entity) by comparing the current revenue or sales of the vendor, based on current tax return or filing information and/or electronic transactions, with the reported revenue or sales of the vendor obtained from past tax returns or filings over particular date ranges. See at least paragraphs [0030]-[0031], [0044], [0048], [0050] and Figs. 1 and 2.)
and push the serialized invoice objects to the cloud sync server of the cloud-based tax management and reporting system via an invoice sync service endpoint. (Herndon discloses the collection and analysis system includes an audit and compliance engine, which can identify underreporting or non-reporting by a vendor (i.e. entity) by comparing the current revenue or sales of the vendor, based on current tax return or filing information and/or electronic transactions, with the reported revenue or sales of the vendor obtained from past tax returns or filings over particular date ranges. See at least paragraphs [0030]-[0031], [0044], [0048], [0050] and Figs. 1 and 2.)
Claim 11
The system of claim 10, wherein the invoice sync service endpoint corresponds to the REST endpoint exposed by a transactions sync service of the cloud sync server. (Herndon discloses Instructions to apply the determined deduction to electronic transactions associated with the at least one vendor are provided at 305. The instructions (i.e. equivalent in function to a REST endpoint) may be provided by the deduction calculation engine 220 of the collection and analysis system 140 to one or more of the electronic payment processors 120. The instructions are executory in nature and may direct that the relevant electronic payment processors 120 deduct the specified amounts or percentages from the transactions prior to settlement with the vendors. The instructions may further direct the electronic payment processors 120 to send the monies to accounts controlled by the tax authority 110 and/or its agents. See at least paragraph [0057]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074].)
Claim 21
The method of claim 1, wherein generating the tax data includes generating a serialized data object representing a plurality of invoices. (Herndon discloses program modules including data objects. See at least paragraph [0074]. Herndon discloses transaction data may be batched (i.e. representing a plurality of invoices) and/or may be a history of electronic transactions (i.e. representing a plurality of invoices). See at least paragraphs [0026] and [0029].)
Claim 22
The method of claim 1, wherein exposing the REST endpoint enables operations between the local container orchestration and a tenant config sync service or a tenant user sync service. (Herndon discloses communication between the electronic processors for transaction data, parameter files, and user database files. See at least paragraphs [0024], [0035], [0057]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074].)
Claim 23
The method of claim 22, wherein the transaction sync service communicates with a transaction sync client which runs in the local container orchestration as a sidecar container with the local tax engine. (Herndon teaches an interface (i.e. client) which may be implemented in one computing device with the analysis system and calculation engine. See at least paragraphs [0032], [0049] and Fig. 2.)
Claim 24
The method of claim 1, wherein the synchronization time is selected to be at the off-peak network time to reduce a network delay or a network latency. (Although Herndon does disclose uploading of tax data, they might not explicitly disclose synchronizing during off-peak network time. Lam teaches synchronizing client devices to a cloud server during off-peak network time and deleting local data after successful synchronization. See at least paragraphs [0062], [0067] and Fig. 6.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because Lam additionally teaches the motivation that this provides for effective and efficient data communication and synchronization. See at least paragraph [0010].
Also it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
Claim 25
The method of claim 24, wherein the synchronization includes initiating a write operation to one or more database pods associated with the remote tax engine to offload accumulated transaction data. (Although Herndon does disclose uploading of tax data, they might not explicitly disclose synchronizing during off-peak network time. Lam teaches synchronizing client devices to a cloud server (i.e. writing data) during off-peak network time and deleting local data after successful synchronization. See at least paragraphs [0062], [0067] and Fig. 6.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because Lam additionally teaches the motivation that this provides for effective and efficient data communication and synchronization. See at least paragraph [0010].
Also it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herndon et al. (US 2016/0042466 A1 hereinafter Herndon) in view of Lam et al. (US 2020/0275394 A1 hereinafter Lam)
Claim 17
A method for local and cloud-based tax determination operations, the method comprising:
receiving, at a cloud-based tax management and reporting system, tax data from a transaction system, the tax data is generated by a local tax engine associated with the transaction system based on transaction data associated with one or more transactions, the transaction data is obtained from a representational state transfer (REST) endpoint exposed to a container orchestration of the transaction system by a cloud sync server, wherein the tax data represents one or more tax values associated with the one or more transactions, exposing the REST endpoint enables operations between the local container orchestration and a transaction sync service, and the cloud-based tax management and reporting system is remote to the transaction system; and (Herndon discloses obtaining transaction data at vendors (i.e. transaction systems). See at least paragraphs [0020]-[0024]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074]. Herndon discloses Instructions to apply the determined deduction to electronic transactions associated with the at least one vendor are provided at 305. The instructions (i.e. equivalent in function to a REST endpoint) may be provided by the deduction calculation engine 220 of the collection and analysis system 140 to one or more of the electronic payment processors 120. The instructions are executory in nature and may direct that the relevant electronic payment processors 120 deduct the specified amounts or percentages from the transactions prior to settlement with the vendors. The instructions may further direct the electronic payment processors 120 to send the monies to accounts controlled by the tax authority 110 and/or its agents. See at least paragraph [0057].)
transmitting, by the cloud-based tax management and reporting system to the transaction system, an entity level report that is based at least in part on the tax data; (Herndon discloses tax analysis system disclosing determining deductions, audit reports, and a variety of reports based on vendor parameters. See at least paragraphs [0026], [0048], [0050]. Herndon discloses system may be wholly or in part executed in a cloud computing environment. See at least [0096]. Herndon discloses program modules and data may be located in both local and remote computer storage media. See at least paragraph [0074].)
serializing, by the local tax engine, a plurality of invoice documents to generate a plurality of serialized data objects; (Herndon discloses the collection and analysis system includes an audit and compliance engine, which can identify underreporting or non-reporting by a vendor (i.e. entity) by comparing the current revenue or sales of the vendor, based on current tax return or filing information and/or electronic transactions, with the reported revenue or sales of the vendor obtained from past tax returns or filings over particular date ranges. See at least paragraphs [0030]-[0031], [0044], [0048], [0050] and Figs. 1 and 2. Herndon discloses standardization into objects and submission to remote tax engine. See at least paragraphs [0074] and [0078]-[0088].)
…
performing the synchronization, at the synchronization time and using the transaction sync service exposed by the REST endpoint, between the local tax engine and a remote tax engine of the cloud-based tax management reporting system, by pushing at least some of the plurality of serialized data objects to the remote tax engine; (Herndon discloses the collection and analysis system includes an audit and compliance engine, which can identify underreporting or non-reporting by a vendor (i.e. entity) by comparing the current revenue or sales of the vendor, based on current tax return or filing information and/or electronic transactions, with the reported revenue or sales of the vendor obtained from past tax returns or filings over particular date ranges. See at least paragraphs [0030]-[0031], [0044], [0048], [0050] and Figs. 1 and 2. Herndon discloses standardization into objects and submission to remote tax engine. See at least paragraphs [0074] and [0078]-[0088]. Although Herndon does disclose uploading of tax data, they might not explicitly disclose synchronizing during off-peak network time. Lam teaches synchronizing client devices to a cloud server during off-peak network time and deleting local data after successful synchronization. See at least paragraphs [0062], [0067] and Fig. 6.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because Lam additionally teaches the motivation that this provides for effective and efficient data communication and synchronization. See at least paragraph [0010].
Also It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the synchronization method of Lam with the tax data of Herndon because doing so is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
…
The remainder of Claim 17 is substantially similar to corresponding elements already present in Claim 1 and is therefore rejected using similar reasoning
Claim(s) 2-3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herndon et al. (US 2016/0042466 A1 hereinafter Herndon) in view of Lam et al. (US 2020/0275394 A1 hereinafter Lam) further in view of Liu et al. (CN 112241914 A hereinafter Liu; examiner notes page numbers are those of the machine translation) further in view of Sutter et al. (US 2012/0203645 A1 hereinafter Sutter).
Claim 2
The method of claim 1, wherein the local tax engine generates the tax data based further on tax rate data that is stored locally at the transaction system. (Although Herndon does disclose the method of claim 1, they might not explicitly disclose wherein the local tax engine generates the tax data based further on tax rate data that is stored locally at the transaction system. Sutter teaches where in the local tax engine generates the tax data based further on tax rate data that is stored locally at the transaction system (tax rates are cached in a local tax table database). See at least paragraph [0130] and Fig. 4c.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the tax system of Herndon with the local tax rate engine of Sutter to provide wherein the local tax engine generates the tax database further on tax rate data that is stored locally at the transaction system in order to provide a faster means for looking up a local tax rate for local transactions, that also does not rely on having to fetch the data from a remote server.
Also, providing a local tax rate table as taught by Sutter in the system of Herndon is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
Claim 3
The method of claim 2, further comprising automatically receiving an update of the tax rate data from the cloud-based tax management and reporting system. (Although Herndon does disclose the method of Claim 1, they might not explicitly disclose all the features of Claim 3. Sutter teaches a tax service asynchronously and continuously updating tax tables database over the internet by retrieving tax data from tax authority provided tax tables from tax authorities. See at least paragraph [0116] and Fig. 3c.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide automatically receiving an update of the tax rate data from the cloud-based tax management and reporting system as taught by Sutter because Sutter additionally teaches the motivation that it provides a means to obtain tax information for sales in progress. See at least paragraph [0116].
Also, implementing updates for a tax rate table through a cloud-based tax management and reporting system as taught by Sutter into the system of Herndon is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
Claim 5
The method of claim 1, wherein performing the synchronization includes one or more of:
transmitting, from the transaction system to the cloud-based tax management and reporting system, a request for a configuration update; (Examiner applies the citation and rationale from Claim 4 above.)
receiving, at the transaction system from the cloud-based tax management and reporting system, the configuration update; (Examiner applies the citation and rationale from Claim 4 above.)
receiving, at the transaction system from the cloud-based tax management and reporting system, updated tax content; or (Examiner applies the citation and rationale from Claim 4 above.)
transmitting, from the transaction system to the cloud-based tax management and reporting system, one or more of compliance data or tax reporting data. (Examiner applies the citation and rationale from Claim 4 above.)
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herndon et al. (US 2016/0042466 A1 hereinafter Herndon) in view of Lam et al. (US 2020/0275394 A1 hereinafter Lam) further in view of Liu et al. (CN 112241914 A hereinafter Liu; examiner notes page numbers are those of the machine translation) further in view of Ren et al. (CN 109391487 A hereinafter Ren; Examiner notes citations are from the machine translation).
Claim 12
The system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to import a configuration change from the cloud sync server of the cloud-based tax management and reporting system via a config sync service endpoint. (Although Herndon does disclose the system of Claim 9, they might not explicitly disclose Claim 12. Ren teaches updating local configuration information according to a received configuration management instruction, and importing and synchronizing updated configuration information to an entire distributed cloud storage system. See at least abstract and Claim 1 of Ren.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to import a configuration change from a cloud server via a config service endpoint as taught by Ren in the system of Herndon because Ren additionally teaches the motivation that this provides real-time updating of configuration information in a cloud storage system, solving the problems of low efficiency and low reliability of existing static configuration systems. See at least abstract and Claim 1 of Ren.
Also, importing configuration updates from a cloud server via a config endpoint as taught by Ren into the system of Herndon is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
Claim 13
The system of claim 12, wherein the config sync service endpoint corresponds to the REST endpoint exposed by a tenant config sync service of the cloud sync server. (Examiner applies the citation and rationale from Claim 12 above herein.)
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herndon et al. (US 2016/0042466 A1 hereinafter Herndon) in view of Lam et al. (US 2020/0275394 A1 hereinafter Lam) further in view of Liu et al. (CN 112241914 A hereinafter Liu; examiner notes page numbers are those of the machine translation) further in view of Pennington et al. (US 2020/0184440 A1 hereinafter Pennington).
Claim 14
The system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive a user synchronization from the cloud sync server via a user sync service endpoint. (Although Herndon does disclose the system of Claim 9, they might not explicitly disclose all the features of Claim 14. Pennington teaches receiving a user synchronization from a cloud sync server via a user sync service endpoint. See at least the abstract, paragraph [0014] and Fig. 1.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the financial system of Herndon with the cloud system as taught by Pennington because Pennington additionally teaches the motivation that this provides a high performing and reliable Point of Sale system that can operate quickly with or without a network connection to an enterprise main system, which allows for a POS system to be centrally managed and operate offline. See at least paragraph [0003]-[0004].
Also, implementing user synchronization from a cloud server via a user service endpoint as taught by Pennington in the system of Herndon is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.)
Claim 15
The system of claim 14, wherein the user sync service endpoint corresponds to the REST endpoint exposed by a tenant user sync service of the cloud sync server. (Examiner applies the citation and rationale from Claim 14 above herein.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chen et al. (CN 111159274 A) discloses using JSON data formats with a restful interface for an invoice tax control system.
Kumar et al. (“Role of Cloud Computing in Goods and Services Tax(GST) and Future Application”) discloses how cloud computing can assist in tax computations.
Siefken et al. (WO 2020/006440 A1 hereinafter Siefken) discloses providing a point-of-sale transaction system including a remote computer or server (i.e. remote tax engine) located separately from a point-of-sale terminal (local tax engine). See at least paragraphs [0010], [0033], [0042], and [0076].
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM J HILMANTEL whose telephone number is (571)272-8984. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Abhishek Vyas can be reached at (571) 270-1836. 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.
/A.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3691
/ABHISHEK VYAS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3691