Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/29/2025 has been entered.
DETAILED ACTION
The following Non-Final office action is in response to application 17/744,326 filed on 12/29/2025.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-16 and 20-23 are currently pending and have been rejected as follows.
Response to Amendments
Rejections under 35 USC 101 are maintained and updated below. New rejections under 35 USC 103 are issued below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s 35 USC 101 arguments and amendments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive to overcome the rejection.
Applicant argues on p. 10-12 that the claims integrate any abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2A, prong 2 that improves the function of networked computer systems used for dynamic transportation matching by the amended feature of “providing, to the transportation requestor device while the request is in the transportation request queue, information indicating the estimated amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue without being queried by the transportation requestor device” supporting an improvement to the functioning of a computer by reducing the computing resources consumed to identify appropriate transportation matchings and reducing repeated transportation request queries from a requestor device, citing [0026] and [0037] of applicant’s specification. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims do not include a concrete technical mechanism that show how the network or computer is improved. The amended feature of “providing, to the transportation requestor device while the request is in the transportation request queue, information indicating the estimated amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue without being queried by the transportation requestor device” reads as a result-based functional limitation. The claim language of “without being queried by the transportation requestor device” is a result. It does not recite how the information is provided “without being queried by the transportation requestor device.” Merely providing status updates unsolicited or based on a predetermined frequency does not amount to an improvement to a computer or network. Asserting a technical problem of excessive device polling and inefficient resource consumption without a concrete technical implementation does not amount to integrating the abstract idea into a practical application because the claim only recites a desired end result without the technical solution that produces it. The ordered combination of server operations maintaining a transportation request queue, determining current queue length, estimating queue dwell time based on queue length and provider availability in a geographic area, and providing in-queue status are directed to the abstract idea. Implementing these steps on computing architecture does not automatically result in an improvement to a computer or network.
Applicant argues on p. 12 that the claims are eligible at Step 2B because the claims recite significantly more than the abstract idea because it is not well-understood, routine, or conventional for a server to compute a request’s queue wait time from a queue length and an availability level in the geographic area and to deliver an in-queue status to the device without requiring requester queries. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wait time determination based on supply is a routine and conventional metric in many queuing service systems, not limited to transportation. Providing status updates unsolicited or based on a predetermined frequency is also a routine and conventional practice in many queuing service systems, not limited to transportation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s prior art arguments and amendments have been fully considered but they are moot in light of the newly cited Tew reference.
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 1-16 and 20-23 are clearly drawn to at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter recited in 35 U.S.C. 101 (method, system, and non-transitory computer readable storage medium). Claims 1-16 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without integrating the abstract idea into a practical application or amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding Step 1 of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (‘2019 PEG”), Claims 1-11 and 21-23 are directed toward the statutory category of a process (reciting a “method”). Claims 12-16 are directed toward the statutory category of a machine (reciting a “system”). Claim 20 is directed toward the statutory category of an article of manufacturer (reciting a “non-transitory computer readable storage medium”).
Regarding Step 2A, prong 1 of the 2019 PEG, Claims 1, 12 and 20 are directed to an abstract idea by reciting receiving … associated with a transportation requestor, a request to be transported from an initial location within a geographic area to a destination location; placing … in response to receiving the request, the request in a transportation request queue that organizes transportation requests for at least a first form of transportation service; determining … a current length of the transportation request queue, the current length of the transportation request queue indicating at least a minimum amount of time before which the first form of transportation service will be provided … estimating … an amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue based at least in part on the current length of the transportation request queue and an availability level of transportation providers within the geographic area; providing, … while the request is in the transportation request queue, information indicating the estimated amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue without being queried by the transportation requestor device; determining … that an alternative form of transportation service is to be offered … based at least in part on: the estimated amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue; and comparative travel times to the destination location for both the first form of transportation service and the alternative form of transportation service; and providing … the determined alternative form of transportation service … (Example claim 1).
The claims are considered abstract because these steps recite certain methods of organizing human activity like managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). The claims recite managing and processing transportation requests by determining wait times and offering alternative transportation options which is an abstract idea.
Regarding Step 2A, prong 2 of the 2019 PEG, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims (the judicial exception and the additional elements such as a server computer system; one or more physical processors, one or more memories; a transportation requestor device associated with a transportation requestor) are not an improvement to a computer or a technology, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with a particular machine, the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing nor do the claims apply 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 claims as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (see MPEP §§ 2106.05(a-c, e)).
Dependent claims 2-11, 13-16, and 21-23 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the limitations recite mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea ‐ see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, the additional elements have been considered above in Step 2A Prong 2. The claim limitations do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are directed to limitations referenced in MPEP 2106.05I.A. that are not enough to qualify as significantly more when recited in a claim with an abstract idea because the limitations recite mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea ‐ see MPEP 2106.05(f). Applicant's claims mimic conventional, routine, and generic computing by their similarity to other concepts already deemed routine, generic, and conventional [Berkheimer Memorandum, Page 4, item 2] by the following [MPEP § 2106.05(d) Part (II)]. The claims recite steps like: “Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data,” Symantec, “Performing repetitive calculations,” Flook, and “storing and retrieving information in memory,” Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc. (citations omitted), by performing steps to “receiving” a request, “placing” the request in a queue, “determining a current length of the queue, “estimating” an amount of time a request will be in the queue, “providing” estimated queue time, “determining” an alternative form of transportation, and “providing” the alternative form of transportation (example Claim 1).
By the above, the claimed computing “call[s] for performance of the claimed information collection, analysis, and display functions ‘on a set of generic computer components' and display devices” [Elec. Power Group, 830 F.3d at 1355] operating in a “normal, expected manner” [DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d at 1245, 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2014)].
Conclusively, Applicant's invention is patent-ineligible. When viewed both individually and as a whole, Claims 1-16 and 20-23 are directed toward an abstract idea without integration into a practical application and lacking an inventive concept.
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.
Claims 1-16 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of
West et al., US 20180156623 A1, hereinafter West, in view of
Tew et al., US 20150154810 A1, hereinafter Tew, in view of
Erez et al., US 20160231129 A1, hereinafter Erez. As per,
Claims 1, 12, 20
West teaches
A computer-implemented method comprising: /
A system comprising one or more physical processors and one or more memories coupled to one or more of the physical processors, the one or more memories comprising instructions operable when executed by the one or more physical processors to cause the system to perform operations comprising: /
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising computer-readable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor of a server computer system, cause the server computer system to: (West [0106])
receiving, at a server computer system, from a transportation requestor device associated with a transportation requestor, a request to be transported from an initial location within a geographic area to a destination location; (West [0022] “The route client 113 may receive requests for transportation 125 from a user associated with the client device 110, and in response to the request for transportation 125, may arrange transportation for the user. The request for transportation 125 may include an origin address and a destination address;” [0106])
[…];
[…], the current length of the transportation request queue indicating at least a minimum amount of time before which the first form of transportation service will be provided to the transportation requestor device; (West [0024] “The ride sharing service 130 may respond with ride sharing data 135 that includes information such as … an estimated arrival time for the vehicle” noting the request for at least a ride sharing service and an associated wait)
[…];
[…];
determining, at the server computer system, that an alternative form of transportation service is to be offered to the transportation requestor device based at least in part on: the estimated amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue; and […]; and (West [0035] “The route engine 160 may select one of the determined locations based on the ride sharing data 135 and how long it will take the user to arrive at each location. In some implementations, the route engine 160 may select the location that will result in the user spending the least amount of time waiting at the selected location” noting the determined locations based on the ride sharing data which includes the wait time for the original request)
providing, by the server computer system, the determined alternative form of transportation service to the transportation requestor device. (West [0036] “the route engine 160 may display instructions 165 for the original route (i.e., the route between the origin location and the destination location of the request for transportation 125) along with an offer 167 that includes the selected location. The user may select the offer 167 by generating an acceptance 127 using the route client 113, or may reject the offer by generating a rejection 129 using the route client 113” noting the alternative form of transportation service including walking)
West does not explicitly teach, Tew however in the analogous art of transportation planning teaches
placing, at the server computer system and in response to receiving the request, the request in a transportation request queue that organizes transportation requests for at least a first form of transportation service; (Tew [0036] “At 502, the proxy manager 122 receives the commuter request information from the commuter mobile device 152;” [0050] “At 514, the commuter joins the queue;” [0051] “The commuter queue list may be updated by adding, for example, information associated with the commuter” note the request placed in a queue in response to receiving the request)
determining, at the server computer system, a current length of the transportation request queue, […]; (Tew [0044] “The commuter arrival list keeps track of the passengers arriving at the virtual transportation stand, while the commuter queue list keeps track of the passengers that are already waiting or queuing” note the length of the queue tracked; [0018] “commuters (or potential passengers) can be informed of, for instance, the estimated waiting time based on the length of the queue and the availability of vehicles” note the wait time corresponding to the minimum amount of time before a first transportation service arrives)
estimating, at the server computer system, an amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue based at least in part on the current length of the transportation request queue and an availability level of transportation providers within the geographic area; (Tew [0041] “The current supply and demand for transportation at each virtual transportation stand may be determined based on current commuter queue length, current commuter arrival list length, current vehicle queue length, current vehicle arrival list length, commuter queue capacity, vehicle queue capacity, or a combination thereof” note the current commuter queue length and the vehicle supply; [0018] “commuters (or potential passengers) can be informed of, for instance, the estimated waiting time based on the length of the queue and the availability of vehicles” note the wait time)
providing, to the transportation requestor device while the request is in the transportation request queue, information indicating the estimated amount of time that the request will spend in the transportation request queue without being queried by the transportation requestor device; (Tew [0049] “The proxy manager 122 may send a "queue" number to the mobile application 155 to inform the commuter the number of passengers that are ahead of him or her in the queue” note the system sending the queue number without being queried; [0018] “commuters (or potential passengers) can be informed of, for instance, the estimated waiting time based on the length of the queue and the availability of vehicles” note the estimated wait time based on the queue length)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify West’s alternative transportation route planning system to include queue length information in view of Tew in an effort to improve transparency and the experience for travelers (see Tew ¶ [0018] & MPEP 2143G).
West / Tew do not explicitly teach, Erez however in the analogous art of route planning teaches
[…] comparative travel times to the destination location for both the first form of transportation service and the alternative form of transportation service; (Erez fig. 3A noting the route duration times for each form of transportation service; [0055]-[0062])
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify West’s alternative transportation route planning system and Tew’s queue length information to include comparative travel times with alternative transportation services in view of Erez in an effort to enable passengers to plan efficient multi-modal trips (see Erez ¶ [0006] & MPEP 2143G).
Claims 2, 13
West teaches
wherein providing the determined alternative form of transportation service to the transportation requestor device comprises instructing the transportation requestor device on how to access the alternative form of transportation service. (West [0036] “after selecting the location, the route engine 160 may generate and display instructions 165 for the user to walk to the selected location at the route client 113” noting the instructions)
Claims 3, 14
West teaches
wherein the alternative form of transportation service comprises at least one of: walking, cycling, taking a bus, taking a train, taking a subway, or taking a personal mobility vehicle. (West [0038] “the route client 113 may provide the request for transportation 125 received from a user to the route engine 160. The route engine 160 may retrieve the user profile 175 of the user from the user profile data 170. The route engine 160 may determine, using the public transportation data 145, one or more routes (e.g., bus routes or train lines) that the user can take to get from the origin location to the destination location of the request for transportation 125” noting the alternative form of transportation including taking a bus)
Claims 4, 15
West teaches
wherein providing the determined alternative form of transportation to the transportation requestor device includes providing instructions for a combination of at least two of: walking, cycling, taking a bus, taking a train, taking a subway, or taking a personal mobility vehicle. (West [0036] “Depending on the implementation, after selecting the location, the route engine 160 may generate and display instructions 165 for the user to walk to the selected location at the route client 113. The instructions 165 may include information such as when the user should leave, how long the walk will take, when the vehicle will arrive at the location” noting the two forms of transportation including walking and a rideshare vehicle)
Claims 5, 16
West / Erez do not explicitly teach, Tew however in the analogous art of transportation planning teaches
wherein estimating the amount of time comprises estimating the amount of time based at least in part on historical data. (Tew [0056] “historical transportation demand and supply information derived from, for example, request information, commuter queue lists, commuter arrival lists, vehicle queue lists, vehicle arrival lists, etc. may be compiled over time and stored for further analysis”)
The motivation/rationale to combine West/ Erez with Tew persists.
Claims 6, 17
West teaches
wherein determining that the alternative form of transportation service is to be offered to the transportation requestor device is further based on the current length being at least a specified minimum length. (West [0061] “The expected cost and expected wait time for each of the determined locations may be determined by the location engine 220 from the ride sharing data 135;” [0064] “the location engine 220 may select locations for each received request for transportation 125. Alternatively, the location engine 220 may only select locations for requests for transportation 125 that are associated with a condition as determined by the condition engine 215. The location engine 220 may select the locations from the plurality of locations that are not also associated with the condition (or another condition)” noting the location selected based on a condition)
Claims 7, 18
West teaches
wherein determining that the alternative form of transportation service is to be offered to the transportation requestor device is further based on an estimated time of the request being in the transportation request queue. (West [0060] “After determining the plurality of locations, the location engine 220 may select the one or more locations from the determined plurality of locations. Where the request for transportation 125 is a request for a vehicle associated with a ride sharing service 130, the location engine 220 may select the one or more locations by minimizing one or more of … an expected wait time for the user at the location” noting the expected wait time)
Claims 8, 19
West teaches
wherein determining that the alternative form of transportation service is to be offered to the transportation requestor device is further based on an estimated time of travel from the initial location to the destination location. (West [0060] “After determining the plurality of locations, the location engine 220 may select the one or more locations from the determined plurality of locations. Where the request for transportation 125 is a request for a vehicle associated with a ride sharing service 130, the location engine 220 may select the one or more locations by minimizing one or more of … a total time spent traveling for the user;” [0067] “The offer 167 may indicate each of the selected locations and may provide information or statistics about each location such as an expected travel time to each location, an estimated wait time for each location” noting the determination based on the time spent traveling)
Claim 9
West teaches
wherein determining that the alternative form of transportation service is to be offered to the transportation requestor device is further based on an estimated time to travel to the transportation requestor's destination location using the alternative form of transportation service. (West [0060] “After determining the plurality of locations, the location engine 220 may select the one or more locations from the determined plurality of locations. Where the request for transportation 125 is a request for a vehicle associated with a ride sharing service 130, the location engine 220 may select the one or more locations by minimizing one or more of … a total time spent traveling for the user;” [0067] “The offer 167 may indicate each of the selected locations and may provide information or statistics about each location such as an expected travel time to each location, an estimated wait time for each location” noting the determination based on the time spent traveling)
Claim 10
West teaches
wherein a fare associated with the request is based, at least in part, on the current length of the transportation request queue. (West [0023] “The fares charged by these services may be a flat rate, or may be dependent on factors such as location, distance, time-of-day, number of vehicles being requested, and the number of vehicles that are available for picking up users” noting the number of vehicles being requested)
Claim 11
West teaches
wherein the fare associated with the transportation request is increased, decreased, or maintained according to the current length of the transportation request queue in the geographic area. (West [0023] “The fares charged by these services may be a flat rate, or may be dependent on factors such as location, distance, time-of-day, number of vehicles being requested, and the number of vehicles that are available for picking up users” noting the fare dependent on the number of vehicles being requested and the location)
Claim 21
West / Erez do not explicitly teach, Tew however in the analogous art of transportation planning teaches
wherein determining the current length of the transportation request queue comprises counting the transportation requests stored in a server-maintained queue associated with the geographic area. (Tew [0041] “The current supply and demand for transportation at each virtual transportation stand may be determined based on current commuter queue length … if the number of commuters currently queuing at the existing stand (i.e. current commuter queue length)” note the current queue length corresponding to a number/count of requests in the queue; [0040] “the load balancer 126 may search for an existing virtual transportation stand that is within a predetermined radius of the commuter's current location;” [0043] “Each virtual transportation stand may be associated with a unique identifier … a location;” [0025] “Central computer system 106 may act as a server and operate in a networked environment using logical connections to one or more commuter mobile devices 152” note the queue bound to a stand located within a radius of the commuter)
The motivation/rationale to combine West/ Erez with Tew persists.
Claim 22
West / Erez do not explicitly teach, Tew however in the analogous art of transportation planning teaches
wherein the transportation request queue is specific to both the geographic area and the first form of transportation service. (Tew [0016] “A "transportation stand", as used herein, generally refers to a common queue area where transportation vehicles (e.g., taxis, limousines, mini-buses, etc.);” [0035] “the commuter may specify one or more request requirements, such as the number of transportation vehicles desired, the preferred mode of transportation (e.g., taxi)” note the mode of transportation specified; [0040] “the load balancer 126 may search for an existing virtual transportation stand that is within a predetermined radius of the commuter's current location” note the queue is specific to each stand and each stand is specific to a location)
The motivation/rationale to combine West/ Erez with Tew persists.
Claim 23
West / Erez do not explicitly teach, Tew however in the analogous art of transportation planning teaches
wherein the availability level of transportation providers within the geographic area comprises a number of transportation providers that are available to perform the first form of transportation service within the geographic area at a time of the estimating. (Tew [0045] “the vehicle arrival list keeps track of the available transportation vehicles heading towards or arriving at the virtual transportation stand, while the vehicle queue list keeps track of the transportation vehicles that are already waiting or queuing at the virtual transportation stand” note the availability of vehicles tracked; [0018] “At the virtual transportation stand, commuters (or potential passengers) can be informed of, for instance, the estimated waiting time based on the length of the queue and the availability of vehicles” note the estimated wait time based on the length of the queue and the availability of vehicles)
The motivation/rationale to combine West/ Erez with Tew persists.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20150161564 A1; WO 2017177969 A1; Zhu et al., Real-time vehicle queue estimation of large-scale traffic scene, 2017.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED EL-BATHY whose telephone number is (571)270-5847. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8AM-4:30PM.
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, PATRICIA MUNSON can be reached on (571) 270-5396. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOHAMED N EL-BATHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624