DETAILED ACTION
This final Office action is responsive to amendments filed September 22nd, 2025. Claims 1-4, 8-10, 12, 13, and 16-20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed 9/22/25, with respect to claims 1, 13, 19, and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections of 3/20/25 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments regarding claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 filed 9/2 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 8-9 of the provided remarks, Applicant argues that the amended claims present statutory subject matter. Regarding prong 1 of Step 2A analysis, Applicant argues that the claims do not recite an abstract idea. Beginning on page 8 of the provided remarks, Applicant argues “the ‘user structures’ are actually data structures that include data regarding users”. Continuing on page 9 of the provided remarks, Applicant argues “the relationships are likewise represented by stored data in the respective data structure”. Examiner asserts that while Applicant argues that the claimed “data structures” do not recite interpersonal behaviors, per paragraph [0012] of the as-filed Specification, “The system includes Multiline MLM organization, which is a distribution organization characterized by a multi-level payment structure. In a Multiline MLM organization, a user is a distributor or a sales agent and may earn commission based on their own sales and the sales of other users.” Therefore, the argued data structure discloses the interrelationships of users within a multi-level payment structure which recites managing relationships and interactions Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Continuing on page 9 of the provided remarks, Applicant argues, citing MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III), “the human mind cannot manipulate data structures within a database, let alone perform the specifically claimed merger of two distinct data structures or creating a new merged multiline structure to be stored in memory”. Examiner respectfully disagrees and begins by asserting that the claim does not recite, “manipulate data structures within a database”. Following the recitation of storing the information in the database, the claim recites “receiving data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure” and subsequent “merging the first non-multiline structure and the second non-multiline structure to create a new merged multiline structure”. The claimed merging functionality is not performed within the database as argued by Applicant. Additionally, the claimed “creating a new merged multiline structure” is recited with a high-level of generality such that the merger based on crossline connection of at least one member based on whether or not a threshold is met could be determined as an evaluation of the human mind. Therefore, the claims recite a mental process. The 35 U.S.C 101 rejection is maintained. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments regarding claim rejections under 35 USC 102(a) filed 9/22/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 9-10 of the provided remarks, Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not disclose the amended claim limitations. Specifically on pages 9-10 of the provided remarks, Applicant argues “None of the cited prior art references teach the claimed ‘creating the new merged multiline structure includes creating at least one crossline connected to the at least one member based on threshold criteria met and not met by the at least one member’ as recited in the independent claims.” Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that cited primary reference Cooper (U.S 2014/0074625 A1) discloses in paragraphs [0082-83] and Figure 9 the cross-line re-entry of the multi-line structure based on the volume of sales flow. Therefore, the cited prior art discloses the amended claim limitations. The 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection is maintained. Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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 non-statutory subject matter;
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so, it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Step 1: Independent claims 1 (method), 19 (system), and 20 (non-transitory computer-readable storage medium) and dependent claims 2-18, respectively, fall within at least one of the four statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. 101: (i) process; (ii) machine; (iii) manufacture; or (iv) composition of matter. Claim 1 is directed to a method (i.e. process), claim 19 is directed to a system (i.e. machine), and claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (i.e. manufacture).
Step 2A Prong 1: The independent claims recite a method for merging at least two multi-level structures into a multiline structure, the method comprising: storing information in a database regarding data structures that include at least a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships and a second non-multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; receiving data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member; merging the first non-multiline structure and the second non-multiline structure to create a new merged multiline structure that includes the at least one member, wherein creating the new merged multiline structure includes creating at least one crossline connection to the at least one member based on threshold criteria met and not met by the at least one member, and wherein the set of relationships of the at least one member is integrated into and maintained within the merged multiline structure; and storing the merged multiline structure in memory, wherein the merged multiline structure is updateable to add one or more additional lines corresponding to new relationships with the at least one member (claims 1 & 20) and A system for merging at least two multi-level structures into a multiline structure, the system comprising: a first non-multiline database that stores information regarding a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; a second non-multiline database that stores information regarding a second non- multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; a merger module in communication with the first non-multiline database and the second non-multiline database, wherein the merger module is executable by a processor to: receive data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member, and merge the first non-multiline structure and the second non-multiline structure to create a new merged multiline structure that includes the at least one member, wherein creating the new merged multiline structure includes creating at least one crossline connection to the at least one member based on threshold criteria met and not met by the at least one member, and wherein the set of relationships of the at least one member is integrated into and maintained within the merged multiline structure; and a multiline database that stores the merged multiline structure in memory, wherein the merged multiline structure is updateable to add one or more additional lines corresponding to new relationships with the at least one member (claim 19) (Certain Method of Organizing Human Activity & Mental Process), which are considered to be abstract ideas (See PEG 2019 and MPEP 2106.05). [Examiner notes the underlined limitations above recite the abstract idea].
The steps/functions disclosed above and in the independent claims recite the abstract idea of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity because the claimed limitations are merging two structures to create a new structure integrating relationships, which is managing relationships and interactions. The Applicant’s claimed limitations are merging structures, which recite the abstract idea of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity.
The steps/functions disclosed above and in the independent claims recite the abstract idea of Mental Process because the claimed limitations are merging two structures to create a new structure integrating relationships by creating at least one crossline connection to the at least one member based on threshold criteria met or not met, which is a concept performed in the human mind and/or with the aid of pen & paper. The Applicant’s claimed limitations are merging structures, which recite the abstract idea of Mental Process.
In addition, dependent claims 2-5 and 7-18 further narrow the abstract idea and recite further defining the addition of lines to the merged structure; raising the threshold maximum number; identifying threshold criteria; generating a new unique code based on usage; creating a new relationship between the new member; identifying one or more relationship; associating the at least one and the upline members with an online interaction based on usage; modifying the set of relationships; updating the data based on the modification to the set of relationships; adjusting a rate of distribution of the at least one member based on a comparison between a cumulative historical distribution of the at least one member within the respective non-multiline structure and a cumulative expected distribution of the at least one member within the merged multiline structure. These processes are similar to the abstract idea noted in the independent claims because they further the limitations of the independent claims which recite a certain method of organizing human activity which include managing relationships as well as mental processes. Accordingly, these claim elements do not serve to confer subject matter eligibility to the claims since they recite abstract ideas. Dependent claim 6 will be discussed in Prong 2 analysis below.
Step 2A Prong 2: In this application, even if not directed toward the abstract idea, the above “stores information regarding a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; stores information regarding a second non- multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; stores the merged multiline structure in memory; receive data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member; storing information in a database regarding data structures that include at least a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships and a second non-multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; receiving data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member; storing the merged multiline structure in memory, wherein the merged multiline structure is updateable to add one or more additional lines corresponding to new relationships with the at least one member” steps/functions of the independent claims would not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because receiving/storing data and displaying data merely add insignificant extra-solution activity and merely adds the words to apply it with the judicial exception. Also, the claimed “a database; a webpage; a database in memory; a device; A system for merging at least two multi-level structures into a multiline structure, the system comprising: a first non-multiline database; a second non-multiline database; a merger module in communication with the first non-multiline database and the second non-multiline database, wherein the merger module is executable by a processor; a multiline database; A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium, having embodied thereon a program executable by a processor” would not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because the claimed structure merely adds the words to apply it with the judicial exception and mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer (See PEG 2019 and MPEP 2106.05).
In addition, dependent claims 2-5 and 7-18 further narrow the abstract idea and dependent claims 8 and 15 additionally recite “storing information regarding the new relationship in association with the new unique code” and “storing the data in a database in memory” which do not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because receiving/storing data and displaying data merely add insignificant extra-solution activity and the claimed “database in memory” which do not account for additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application because the claimed structure merely adds the words to apply it with the judicial exception and mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer (See PEG 2019 and MPEP 2106.05).
Dependent claim 6 recites “wherein the unique code is an embedded uniform resource location (URL) of a webpage”. This dependent claim does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because the claims, individually, and in combination, when viewed as a whole, are not an improvement to a computer or a technology, the claims do not apply the judicial exception with a particular machine, and the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as in the instant claims, is not indicative of integration into a practical application – see MPEP 2106.05(h); adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as in the instant claims, is also not indicative of integration into a practical application – see MPEP 2106.05(f).
The claimed “a database; a webpage; a database in memory; a device; A system for merging at least two multi-level structures into a multiline structure, the system comprising: a first non-multiline database; a second non-multiline database; a merger module in communication with the first non-multiline database and the second non-multiline database, wherein the merger module is executable by a processor; a multiline database; A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium, having embodied thereon a program executable by a processor” are recited so generically (no details whatsoever are provided other than that they are general purpose computing components and regular office supplies) that they represent no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception on a computer. These limitations can also be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to generally link the use of the judicial exception to the technological environment of a computer. Even when viewed in combination, the additional elements in the claims do no more than use the computer components as a tool. There is no change to the computers and other technology that is recited in the claim, and thus the claims do not improve computer functionality or other technology (See PEG 2019).
Step 2B: When analyzing the additional element(s) and/or combination of elements in the claim(s) other than the abstract idea per se the claim limitations amount(s) to no more than: a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and merely amounts to the application or instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer (See MPEP 2106.05 and PEG 2019). Further, method claims 1-18; system claim 19; and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim 20 recite “a database; a webpage; a database in memory; a device; A system for merging at least two multi-level structures into a multiline structure, the system comprising: a first non-multiline database; a second non-multiline database; a merger module in communication with the first non-multiline database and the second non-multiline database, wherein the merger module is executable by a processor; a multiline database; A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium, having embodied thereon a program executable by a processor”; however, these elements merely facilitate the claimed functions at a high level of generality and they perform conventional functions and are considered to be general purpose computer components which is supported by Applicant’s specification in Paragraph 0018 and Figure 1. The Applicant’s claimed additional elements are mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a general purpose computer and generally link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Also, the above “stores information regarding a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; stores information regarding a second non- multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; stores the merged multiline structure in memory; receive data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member; storing information in a database regarding data structures that include at least a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships and a second non-multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships; receiving data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member; storing the merged multiline structure in memory, wherein the merged multiline structure is updateable to add one or more additional lines corresponding to new relationships with the at least one member” steps/functions of the independent claims would not account for significantly more than the abstract idea because receiving data and displaying/presenting data (See MPEP 2106.05) have been identified as well-known, routine, and conventional steps/functions to one of ordinary skill in the art. When viewed as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
In addition, claims 2-5 and 7-18 further narrow the abstract idea identified in the independent claims. The Examiner notes that the dependent claims merely further define the data being analyzed and how the data is being analyzed. Similarly, claims 8 and 15 additionally recite “storing information regarding the new relationship in association with the new unique code” and “storing the data in a database in memory” which do not account for additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because receiving data and displaying/presenting data (See MPEP 2106.05) have been identified as well-known, routine, and conventional steps/functions to one of ordinary skill in the art and the claimed “database in memory” which do not account for additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because the claimed structure merely amounts to the application or instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer and does not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment (See MPEP 2106.05).
Dependent claim 6 recites “wherein the unique code is an embedded uniform resource location (URL) of a webpage”. This dependent claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, because these additional elements, individually, or in combination, do not recite anything that is beyond conventional and routine activity or use of computers, do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, nor do they apply the judicial exception to a particular field of use or technological environment. Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)), or generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05(h)), as in the instant Claim is not indicative of an inventive concept (“significantly more”).
The additional limitations of the independent and dependent claim(s) when considered individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The examiner has considered the dependent claims in a full analysis including the additional limitations individually and in combination as analyzed in the independent claim(s). Therefore, the claim(s) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cooper (U.S 2014/0074625 A1).
Claim 1
Regarding Claim 1, Cooper discloses the following:
A method for merging at least two structures into a multiline structure, the method comprising [see at least Paragraph 0084 for reference to the method being implemented by a computer system configured to optimize commissions in a multi-level marketing system; Figure 10 and related text regarding a method of optimizing commissions in the multi-level marketing system]
storing information in a database regarding data structures that include at least a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships and a second non-multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships [see at least Paragraph 0011 for reference to the system mapping using existing binary plans, uni-level plans, or matrix plans; Paragraph 0091 for reference to identifying a first tree representation stored on a computer readable medium of a first multi-level marketing system; Figure 11 and related text regarding item 1102 ‘Identify A First Tree Representation Stored On A Computer Readable Medium of A First Multi-Level Marketing System’]
receiving data for at least one member of the first non- multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0011 for reference to the system mapping using existing binary plans, uni-level plans, or matrix plans; Paragraph 0049 for reference to a virtual tree is constructed to only include all the individuals income positions connected by their genealogical relationship]
merging the first non-multiline structure and the second non-multiline structure to create a new merged multiline structure that includes the at least one member, wherein creating the new merged multiline structure includes creating at least one crossline connection to the at least one member based on threshold criteria met and not met by the at least one member, and wherein the set of relationships of the at least one member is integrated into and maintained within the merged multiline structure [see at least Paragraph 0077 for reference to the multi-line tree structure allowing for generations of commissions from individuals placed in a downline regardless of the levels down; Paragraph 0078 for reference to given that the multi-line accommodates both plans of infinite depth and width, companies can now merge compensation plans by adopting the multi-line structure as illustrated below; Paragraph 0078 for reference to the multi-line distribution plan including the shaded patterns correspond to positions of existing plans or the new multi-line plan and wherein the new multi-line plan is shown that encompasses all of the other previous plans, which are mapped to the multi-line plan; Paragraph 0082 for reference to re-entry’s being granted and placement being anywhere including cross-line to the initial income position of the multi-line structure; Paragraph 0082 for reference to cross-line placement being a distinguished characteristic; Paragraph 0083 for reference to rules are put into place to assure that the sponsor of any individual is benefited continually regardless of the re-entry cross-line placed income position, while also generating commissions for those under whom the re-entry was placed; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing system overlaid on a multi-line system; Figure 9 and related text regarding ‘An Owner’s Cross-Line Re-Entry Income Position’]
storing the merged multiline structure in memory, wherein the merged multiline structure is updateable to add one or more additional lines corresponding to new relationships with the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0078 for reference to the modification of the multi-line structure; Paragraph 0103 for reference to the system using physical and other computer-readable media for carrying or storing computer-executable instructions and/ or data structures; Paragraph 0104 for reference to the examples of memory for storage; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing system overlaid on a multi-line system]
Claim 2
Regarding Claim 2, Cooper discloses the following:
The method of claim 1, further comprising adding the additional lines to the merged multiline structure until a threshold maximum number is reached [see at least Paragraph 0076 for reference to the uni-level tree structure containing a finite depth; Paragraph 0089 for reference to the multi-level marketing system is a system that has a predetermined maximum width or depth; Paragraph 0095 for reference to the first multi-level marketing system is a system that has a predetermined maximum width or depth]
Claim 5
Regarding Claim 5, Cooper discloses the following:
The method of claim 2, wherein adding the additional lines is based on online usage of a unique code associated with the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0102 for reference to the system implement the functionality described herein and which also extends to automatic identification, tracking and payment of commissions for the distribution lines, as well as auto-mapping and generation of new multi-line distribution trees that correspond to existing compensation plans, and for performing the auto-balancing or any other functionality described herein]
Claim 19
Regarding Claim 19, Cooper discloses the following:
A system for merging at least two multi-level structures into a multiline structure, the system comprising [see at least Paragraph 0084 for reference to the method being implemented by a computer system configured to optimize commissions in a multi-level marketing system; Figure 6 and related text regarding a graphical representation of various multi-level marketing systems; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing systems overlaid on a multi-line system]
a first non-multiline database that stores information regarding a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships [see at least Paragraph 0011 for reference to the system mapping using existing binary plans, uni-level plans, or matrix plans; Paragraph 0091 for reference to identifying a first tree representation stored on a computer readable medium of a first multi-level marketing system; Figure 11 and related text regarding item 1102 ‘Identify A First Tree Representation Stored On A Computer Readable Medium of A First Multi-Level Marketing System’]
a second non-multiline database that stores information regarding a second non- multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships [see at least Paragraph 0011 for reference to the system mapping using existing binary plans, uni-level plans, or matrix plans; Paragraph 0091 for reference to identifying a first tree representation stored on a computer readable medium of a first multi-level marketing system; Paragraph 0093 for reference to the method mapping the nodes of a first tree to a second tree representation of a second multi-level marketing system; Paragraph 0103 for reference to the various computer-readable media for storing data structures; Figure 11 and related text regarding item 1102 ‘Identify A First Tree Representation Stored On A Computer Readable Medium of A First Multi-Level Marketing System’]
a merger module in communication with the first non-multiline database and the second non-multiline database, wherein the merger module is executable by a processor to [see at least Paragraph 0105 for reference to the network being defined as one or more data links that enable the transport of electronic data between computer systems and/or modules and/or other electronic devices; Paragraph 0108 for reference to the distributed system environment containing program modules for performing tasks; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing system overlaid on a multi-line system]
receive data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within a respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0011 for reference to the system mapping using existing binary plans, uni-level plans, or matrix plans; Paragraph 0049 for reference to a virtual tree is constructed to only include all the individuals income positions connected by their genealogical relationship]
merge the first non-multiline structure and the second non-multiline structure to create a new merged multiline structure that includes the at least one member, wherein the set of relationships of the at least one member is integrated into and maintained within the merged multiline structure [see at least Paragraph 0077 for reference to the multi-line tree structure allowing for generations of commissions from individuals placed in a downline regardless of the levels down; Paragraph 0078 for reference to given that the multi-line accommodates both plans of infinite depth and width, companies can now merge compensation plans by adopting the multi-line structure as illustrated below; Paragraph 0078 for reference to the multi-line distribution plan including the shaded patterns correspond to positions of existing plans or the new multi-line plan and wherein the new multi-line plan is shown that encompasses all of the other previous plans, which are mapped to the multi-line plan; Paragraph 0082 for reference to re-entry’s being granted and placement being anywhere including cross-line to the initial income position of the multi-line structure; Paragraph 0082 for reference to cross-line placement being a distinguished characteristic; Paragraph 0083 for reference to rules are put into place to assure that the sponsor of any individual is benefited continually regardless of the re-entry cross-line placed income position, while also generating commissions for those under whom the re-entry was placed; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing system overlaid on a multi-line system; Figure 9 and related text regarding ‘An Owner’s Cross-Line Re-Entry Income Position’]
a multiline database that stores the merged multiline structure in memory, wherein the merged multiline structure is updateable to add one or more additional lines corresponding to new relationships with the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0078 for reference to the modification of the multi-line structure; Paragraph 0103 for reference to the system using physical and other computer-readable media for carrying or storing computer-executable instructions and/ or data structures; Paragraph 0104 for reference to the examples of memory for storage; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing system overlaid on a multi-line system]
Claim 20
Regarding Claim 20, Cooper discloses the following:
A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium, having embodied thereon a program executable by a processor to perform a method for merging at least two multi-level structures into a multiline structure, the method comprising [see at least Paragraph 0084 for reference to the method being implemented by a computer system configured to optimize commissions in a multi-level marketing system; Paragraph 0104 for reference to example computer storage media which can be used to store desired program code means in the form of computer-executable instructions or data structures and which can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer; Figure 10 and related text regarding a method of optimizing commissions in the multi-level marketing system]
storing information in a database regarding at least a first non-multiline structure with a first set of lines corresponding to existing relationships and a second non-multiline structure with a second set of lines corresponding to existing relationships [see at least Paragraph 0011 for reference to the system mapping using existing binary plans, uni-level plans, or matrix plans; Paragraph 0091 for reference to identifying a first tree representation stored on a computer readable medium of a first multi-level marketing system; Figure 11 and related text regarding item 1102 ‘Identify A First Tree Representation Stored On A Computer Readable Medium of A First Multi-Level Marketing System’]
receiving data for at least one member of the first non-multiline structure or the second non-multiline structure, the data regarding at least a position of the at least one member within the respective non-multiline structure and corresponding to a set of relationships of the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0011 for reference to the system mapping using existing binary plans, uni-level plans, or matrix plans; Paragraph 0049 for reference to a virtual tree is constructed to only include all the individuals income positions connected by their genealogical relationship]
merging the first non-multiline structure and the second non-multiline structure to create a new merged multiline structure that includes the at least one member, wherein creating the new merged multiline structure includes creating at least one crossline connection to the at least one member based on threshold criteria met and not met by the at least one member, and wherein the set of relationships of the at least one member is integrated into and maintained within the merged multiline structure [see at least Paragraph 0077 for reference to the multi-line tree structure allowing for generations of commissions from individuals placed in a downline regardless of the levels down; Paragraph 0078 for reference to given that the multi-line accommodates both plans of infinite depth and width, companies can now merge compensation plans by adopting the multi-line structure as illustrated below; Paragraph 0078 for reference to the multi-line distribution plan including the shaded patterns correspond to positions of existing plans or the new multi-line plan and wherein the new multi-line plan is shown that encompasses all of the other previous plans, which are mapped to the multi-line plan; Paragraph 0082 for reference to re-entry’s being granted and placement being anywhere including cross-line to the initial income position of the multi-line structure; Paragraph 0082 for reference to cross-line placement being a distinguished characteristic; Paragraph 0083 for reference to rules are put into place to assure that the sponsor of any individual is benefited continually regardless of the re-entry cross-line placed income position, while also generating commissions for those under whom the re-entry was placed; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing system overlaid on a multi-line system; Figure 9 and related text regarding ‘An Owner’s Cross-Line Re-Entry Income Position’]
storing the merged multiline structure in memory, wherein the merged multiline structure is updateable to add one or more additional lines corresponding to new relationships with the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0078 for reference to the modification of the multi-line structure; Paragraph 0103 for reference to the system using physical and other computer-readable media for carrying or storing computer-executable instructions and/ or data structures; Paragraph 0104 for reference to the examples of memory for storage; Figure 7 and related text regarding various multi-level marketing system overlaid on a multi-line system]
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) 3-4, 9, and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cooper (U.S 2014/0074625 A1) in view of Campbell (U.S 2013/0204672 A1).
Claim 3
While Cooper discloses the limitations above, it does not disclose raising the threshold maximum number based on the threshold criteria being met.
Regarding Claim 3, Campbell discloses the following:
raising the threshold maximum number based on the threshold criteria being met [see at least Paragraph 0029 for reference to the distributor can be paid a percentage of PV in the distributor’s downline when the quantity of PV of the distributor and/or the distributor’s downline reaches a set of predetermined thresholds; Paragraph 0050-51 for reference to the volume requirement of individual levels and the corresponding rewarding changing; Paragraph 0052 for reference to distributors being compensated up to a certain level; Figure 3 and related text regarding progressive pay portals in a distributors downline]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multi-line structure to Cooper to include the threshold maximum number of Campbell. Doing so would reduce the likelihood of a decrease in the sales volume of an initial product category when further product categories are introduced, as stated by Campbell (Paragraph 0009).
Claim 4
While the combination of Cooper and Campbell disclose limitations above, Cooper does not disclose identifying that the threshold criteria are met based on weighting one or more of the relationships between the at least one member and one or more members that are downline from the at least one member within the merged multiline structure.
Regarding Claim 4, Campbell discloses the following:
The method of claim 3, further comprising identifying that the threshold criteria are met based on weighting one or more of the relationships between the at least one member and one or more members that are downline from the at least one member within the merged multiline structure [see Paragraph 0029 for reference to the distributor can be paid a percentage of PV in the distributor’s downline when the quantity of PV of the distributor and/or the distributor’s downline reaches a set of predetermined thresholds; Paragraph 0051 for reference to the percentage may vary based on the level of the member in the distributor’s downline; Paragraph 0051 for reference to the percentage paid on PV of the members in the distributors frontline can be about 15%, whereas, the percentage paid on PV of the members in the distributor’s second and third level can be about 10%]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multi-line structure to Cooper to include the threshold maximum number of Campbell. Doing so would reduce the likelihood of a decrease in the sales volume of an initial product category when further product categories are introduced, as stated by Campbell (Paragraph 0029).
Claim 9
While Cooper discloses the limitations above, it does not disclose identifying one or more relationships with one or more members that are upline from the at least one member within the merged multiline structure based on the data for the at least one member.
Regarding Claim 9, Campbell discloses the following:
The method of claim 1, further comprising identifying one or more relationships with one or more members that are upline from the at least one member within the merged multiline structure based on the data for the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0039 for reference to a compensation system of the network marketing organization can be configured to recognize who purchased each product, and where the purchaser is positioned in the network marketing organization so that the appropriate upline distributor(s) can be identified, credited, and ultimately compensated for purchases made by distributors and customers in his or her downline]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multi-line structure to Cooper to include the upline relationship identification of Campbell. Doing so can compensate distributors in a network marketing system based on a progressive pay compensation plan, as stated by Campbell (Paragraph 0029).
Claim 11
While Cooper discloses the limitations above, it does not disclose modifying the set of relationships of the at least one member based the set of relationships exceeding the threshold maximum number.
Regarding Claim 11, Campbell discloses the following:
The method of claim 2, further comprising modifying the set of relationships of the at least one member based the set of relationships exceeding the threshold maximum number [see at least Paragraph 0052 for reference to the maximum number of levels can be modified to be, for example, three, four, five, seven, eight, nine, ten, more than ten, or limitless]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multi-line structure to Cooper to include the threshold maximum number of Campbell. Doing so would reduce the likelihood of a decrease in the sales volume of an initial product category when further product categories are introduced, as stated by Campbell (Paragraph 0029).
Claim 12
While the combination of Cooper and Campbell disclose the limitations above, Cooper does not disclose modifying the set of relationships includes identifying another member in the merged multiline structure based on the position of the at least one member of the non-multiline structure.
Regarding Claim 12, Campbell discloses the following:
The method of claim 11, wherein modifying the set of relationships includes identifying another member in the merged multiline structure based on the position of the at least one member of the non-multiline structure [see at least Paragraph 0036 for reference to a distributor’s downline includes the distributor’s direct recruits, recruits’ recruits and so on such that there may be multiple levels of people receiving commissions from one person’s sales; Figure 1 and related text regarding a network marketing organization displaying 5 distributors and 3 customers]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multi-line structure to Cooper to include the relationship modification of Campbell. Doing so would reduce the likelihood of a decrease in the sales volume of an initial product category when further product categories are introduced, as stated by Campbell (Paragraph 0029).
Claim 13
While the combination of Cooper and Campbell disclose the limitations above, Cooper does not disclose modifying the set of relationships includes creating a relationship between a new member to the other member.
Regarding Claim 13, Campbell discloses the following:
The method of claim 12, wherein modifying the set of relationships includes creating a relationship between a new member to the other member [see at least Paragraph 0037 for reference to the primary distributor recruiting two customers as well as three additional distributors; Figure 1 and related text regarding a network marketing organization displaying 5 distributors and 3 customers]
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the multi-line structure to Cooper to include the relationship modification of Campbell. Doing so would reduce the likelihood of a decrease in the sales volume of an initial product category when further product categories are introduced, as stated by Campbell (Paragraph 0029).
Claim 14
While the combination of Cooper and Campbell disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 14, Cooper discloses the following:
The method of claim 13, wherein modifying the set of relationships includes severing a previous relationship between the new member and the at least one member, and creating a different relationship between the new member and the at least one member [see at least Paragraph 0078 for reference to the binary tree structure cannot be merged into either the unilevel tree structure or the matrix tree structure, or vice versa without changing the parent/ child hierarchical structure; Figure 6 and related text regarding a graphical representation of various multi-level marketing systems]
Claim 15
While the combination of Cooper and Campbell disclose the limitations above, regarding Claim 15, Cooper discloses the following:
The method of claim 11, further comprising storing the data in a database in memory, wherein the data is updated based on the modification to th