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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/11/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-15, 17, 19-20, 22, 24-28 remain pending in this application.
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph rejection of claims 7-8 has been withdrawn in light of the amendments.
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 1-2, 5-10, 13-15, 17, 19-20, 22 and 24-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-2, 5-8, 22, 24 and 26 are drawn to a method which is within the four statutory categories (i.e. process). Claims 9-10, 13-14, 25 and 27 are drawn to a system which is within the four statutory categories (i.e. machine). Claims 15, 17, 19-20 and 28 are drawn to a non-transitory medium which is within the four statutory categories (i.e. manufacture).
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Claim 1, 9 and 15 have been amended to recite and directed to an abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activity, which claim limitations provided below with markings separating abstract elements from the additional limitations, wherein the bolded style represents the additional limitations beyond abstract idea and remaining limitations are directed to the abstract idea as discussed below:
“…hosting, by one or more processors of a pet platform, a pet care services portal corresponding to a user and a pet on a user device, wherein the hosting includes displaying the pet care services portal being based on a user profile database record of the user and a pet profile database record of the pet on the user device;
authenticating, by the one or more processors, a plurality of external pet systems corresponding to a plurality of provider services to validate that each of the plurality of external pet systems corresponds to a section of the pet care services portal, wherein the authenticating includes:
transmitting, by the one or more processors, an electronic communication to an external pet service device associated with at least one of the plurality of external pet systems;
receiving, by the one or more processors, a response electronic communication that includes a unique identifier from the external pet service device;
verifying, by the one or more processors, that the unique identifier corresponds to an external pet system of the plurality of external pet systems; and
in response to the verifying, associating, by the one or more processors, the verified external pet system with a service provider database record in a pet care platform database;
determining, by the one or more processors, one or more access restrictions for at least one of the plurality of authenticated external pet systems;
selecting, by the one or more processors, a data subset of the pet profile database record based on the one or more access restrictions for the at least one of the plurality of external pet systems;
transmitting, by the one or more processors, the data subset to the external pet service device of the at least one of the plurality of authenticated external pet systems;
receiving, by the one or more processors, pet service search data input by the user via the pet care services portal;
in response to the receiving, determining, by the one or more processors, one or more external pet care systems of the plurality of authenticated external pet systems that match the pet service search data based the location data of the user and travel boundary data of the at least one of the plurality of external pet systems;
receiving, by the one or more processors, a user selection via a user interface of an authenticated external pet care system from one or more displayed external pet care systems,
determining, by the one or more processors, a medical record requirement for the selected external pet care system, wherein the medical record requirement includes a vaccination requirement and a time threshold;
identifying, by the one or more processors, from the pet profile database record, an external pet medical system associated with the pet and a pet identifier of the pet known to the external pet medical system;
sending, by the one or more processors, a medical record request associated with the pet to the external pet medical system, the medical record request including the pet identifier and indicating the medical record requirement, wherein sending the medical record request to the external pet medical system triggers the external pet medical system to determine whether a medical record of the pet satisfies the medical record requirement;
based on sending the medical record request, receiving, by the one or more processors, a portion of medical record data corresponding to the pet identifier from the external pet medical system, wherein the portion of the medical record data includes an indicator corresponding to whether the pet satisfies the medical record requirement and a subset of additional medical details;
creating, by the one or more processors, a reservation based on the portion of the medical record data by including the indicator in a reservation database record, wherein the creating includes populating the reservation database record with a subset of the portion of the medical record data; and
in response to the creating, associating, by the one or more processors, the pet profile database record with the service provider database record of the selected external pet care system;
automatically generating, by the one or more processors, based on creating the reservation, an electronic alert to an electronic device associated with the user, wherein the electric alert is configured as a notification email or a reminder email; and
based on the automatically generating, automatically sending by the one or more processors, the electric alert to the user device.”
These limitations correspond to “certain methods of organizing human activity” (with a recitation of generic computing components-one or more processors), based on managing personal behavior and interactions between people regarding determining one or more external pet care services that match with a request and location data, creating a reservation for pet care service, upon creating the reservation, determining a medical record requirement for the selected pet care service. This is a method of managing interactions between people (such as user following rules and instructions). The mere nominal recitation of a generic processor, generic user device with interface and generic memory devices does not take the claim out of the methods of organizing human interactions grouping.
The processor and the user device are recited at a high level of generality, and claim steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic devices. The current specification recites “In the following methods, various acts may be described as performed or executed by a component from FIG. 15, such as the server system 1515, the user device 1505, or components thereof. However, it should be understood that in various embodiments, various components of the environment 1500 discussed above may execute instructions or perform acts including the acts discussed below. An act performed by a device may be considered to be performed by a processor, actuator, or the like associated with that device. Further, it should be understood that in various embodiments, various steps may be added, omitted, and/or rearranged in any suitable manner.” in par. 96 and “The user device 1505 may be configured to enable the user to access and/or interact with other systems in the environment 1500. For example, the user device 1505 may be a computer system such as, for example, a desktop computer, a mobile device, a tablet, etc.” in par. 89.
After considering all claim elements, both individually and in combination and in ordered combination, it has been determined that the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Dependent claims 2, 8, 10 also recite an abstract idea of managing interactions between people using generic computing devices (shown bolded), for instance, claims 2, 10 recite “associating, by the one or more processors, the reservation with the user profile database record”, claim 8 recites “determining, by the one or more processors, a training history for the external pet care system; and associating, by the one or more processors, the training history with the medical record” and newly added claim 26-28 recite “determining, by the one or more processors, via the pet care platform, an active status or a non-active status for each of the plurality of external pet systems; and selecting, by the one or more processors, at least one of the plurality of authenticated external pet systems based on the location data and the active status”. These claims also correspond to a user following rules and instructions to determine pet services for the pet using generic computing devices (certain methods of organizing human activity).
Claims 2, 5-8, 10, 13-14, 17, 19-20, 22, 24-28 ultimately dependent from Claims 1, 9 and 15 and include all the limitations of Claims 1, 9 and 15. Therefore, claims 2, 5-8, 10, 13-14, 17, 19-20, 22, 24-28 recite the same abstract idea. Claims 2, 5-8, 10, 13-14, 17, 19-20, 22, 24-28 describe a further limitation regarding the basis for determining pet services for a pet. These are all just further describing the abstract idea recited in claims 1, 9 and 15, without adding significantly more.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claims recite the additional elements that are shown in bolded style above. These additional elements correspond to hardware or software elements, these limitations are not enough to qualify as “practical application” being recited in the claims along with the abstract idea, since these elements are merely invoked as a tool to apply instructions of the abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and mere instructions to apply/implement/automate an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular field or technological environment do not provide practical application for an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f) & (h)).
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. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B:
The claims do 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 element of using one or more processors to perform determining, identifying and associating steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Therefore, claims 1-2, 5-10, 13-15, 17, 19-20, 22, 24-28 are nonetheless rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments will be addressed below in the order in which they appear.
Applicant argues that claims provide a structure that integrates abstract concept into a concrete technological workflow that addresses a problem arising specifically in networked reservation systems. Claims recite automatically determine provider-specific prerequisite needs and orchestrate real-time retrieval and validation of those prerequisites from independent external data custodians.
In response, Examiner submits that the limitations of “determining, by the one or more processors, a medical record requirement for the selected external pet care system”, “sending, by the one or more processors, a medical record request associated with the pet to the external pet medical system, the medical record request including the pet identifier and indicating the medical record requirement,…”, and “based on sending the medical record request, receiving, by the one or more processors, a portion of medical record data corresponding to the pet identifier from the external pet medical system,” is directed to “certain methods of organizing human activity”, with a recitation of generic computing components of one or more processors. The limitation of sending the medical record request to the external pet medical system triggers the external pet medical “sending the medical record request to the external pet medical system triggers the external pet medical system to determine whether a medical record of the pet satisfies the medical record requirement” corresponds to an additional element that is mere instructions to apply/implement/automate an abstract idea in a particular technological environment. Claims do not recite “real-time retrieval and validation” and neither the claims nor the current specification recites how the system provides any technological improvement.
Applicant argues that claims integrate the alleged abstract concept into a specific technological environment involving processor-driven event detection (i.e. reservation creation), automated message generation and electronic transmission protocols. Applicant argues that these features cannot be performed through a mental process.
In response, Examiner submits that automatic message generation and electronic transmission features are not part of the abstract idea, but they are directed to mere instructions to apply/implement/automate an abstract idea in a particular technological environment. The current specification recites “Notifications and/or reminders may include automated emails and/or texts to remind users of upcoming appointments. An “add appointment to calendar” option may provide the ability for users to add booked appointments to their electronic calendar. “ in [0064], and there is no indication of improvement in technology on automated message generation or electronic transmission provided in the current specification.
Therefore, the arguments are not persuasive and claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DILEK B COBANOGLU whose telephone number is (571)272-8295. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 ET.
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, Obeid Mamon can be reached at (571) 270-1813. 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.
/DILEK B COBANOGLU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3687
Prosecution Insights