DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This is a nonfinal rejection in response to amendments/remarks filed on 10/28/2025 in an RCE. Claims 1, 11, and 20 are currently amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and are examined herein.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/28/2025 has been entered.
Priority
The effective date is the earliest filing date of the present disclosure, which was filed on 01/25/2023.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: The representative claims recite A platform for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, or travel, the system comprising(Claim 1 and 11) and A method for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, or travel, the system comprising;(Claim 20). The system, and method, respectively fall under the potentially eligible subject matter category of a process, therefore the claims are to be further analyzed under step 2.
Step 2a Prong 1: The representative claims recite the following(wherein the functional limitations are provided in bolded and the additional elements have been italicized):
Claim 1: A platform for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, or travel, the system comprising:
at least one user computing device in operable connection with a user network;
an application server in operable communication with the user network, the application server configured to host an application system for providing a communication platform for work relocation, general relocation, or travel, the application system having a user interface module for providing access to the application system through the user computing device;
a matching module in communication with the communication platform, the matching module configured to operate on user cards stored in a structured database and to match two or more users using a plurality of user-input parameters specifically related to relocation or travel captured in relocation-specific fields of the user card stored in a structured format within a database and matched using filtering logic that requires at least one of shared relocation criteria, selected from (i) destination location within a radius, (ii) target move window comprising start and end dates, or (iii) employment industry or company, and further configured to generate matches in advance of relocation based on overlapping date ranges; and
a communication module to permit the two or more matched users to communicate using the communication platform through a secure, real-time messaging interface available before, during, and after the target move window integrated with the application system.
Claim 11: A platform for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, or travel, the system comprising:
at least one user computing device in operable connection with a user network;
an application server in operable communication with the user network, the application server configured to host an application system for providing a communication platform for work relocation, general relocation, or travel, the application system having a user interface module for providing access to the application system through the user computing device;
a matching module in communication with the communication platform, the matching module configured to match two or more users using a plurality of user- input parameters provided on a user card associated with each of the two or more users, the user card generated via a card module configured to receive the plurality of user-input parameters and persist them in a structured database for algorithmic filtering, the parameters including relocation-specific criteria selected from the group consisting of (i) destination location within a radius, (ii) target move window comprising start and end dates, or (iii) employment industry or company, and further configured to generate matches in advance of relocation based on overlapping date ranges;
a communication module to permit the two or more matched users to communicate using the communication platform through a real-time messaging interface;
an event module to display on or more user-input events on the user card, the events associated with relocation-related activities;
an expert module in operable communication with the application program to permit an expert to upload media content to be provided to the user, the expert module in operable communication with the communication module to permit the user and the expert to exchange information through an integrated content interface;
a business module in operable communication with the application program to permit a business to upload content to be provided to the user, the business module in operable communication with the communication module to permit the user and the business to exchange information through the communication platform; and
a database engine configured to index and search a listing of one or more of the experts and one or more of the businesses using keyword and categorical filters to allow a user to search a listing of one or more of the experts and one or more of the businesses and to return expert or business results constrained by the user’s destination and timeframe.
Claim 20: A method for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, or travel, the system comprising:
generating, via a user module hosted on an application server, a user account associated with a first user;
inputting, via each user, a plurality of user information, the user information stored in a structured user database, the plurality of user information associated with the user account to create a user card associated with each user, the user information including relocation-specific fields selected from destination location, timeframe, and relocation category;
associating, via an event module, at least one relocation event with the user card, each event including at least a destination region and a start and end date;
filtering, via a matching module operating on the application server, one or more user cards based on shared criteria including event location, date, or user profile similarity by requiring at least one of (i) overlapping event date windows, (ii) destination within a radius, or (iii) common professional background; and
displaying the filtered one or more user cards to at least a second user through a graphical user interface on the user computing device and enabling secure real-time messaging between matched users before, during, and after the target move window.
When given the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, the bolded limitations recite certain methods of organizing human activity, which is considered an abstract idea under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II). The bolded claim limitations recite embodiments with the features of matching two individuals based on their inputted parameters, allowing the users to communicate, displaying the inputs, allowing experts/businesses to provide content, allowing users to exchange information with experts/businesses, allowing the user to search/filter through listings. This process falls under the sub-grouping “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people” including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions, because all of the steps above consist of managing the social activities of a user(see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C)). Furthermore, interactions with experts and businesses for marketing, sales, or legal interactions, such as “permit the user and the business to exchange information through the communication platform” in claim 11 merely recites commercial or legal interactions, sub grouped in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(B). Limitations such as storing the input parameters in the form of user cards on a structured database or that the criteria includes (i) event date windows, (ii) destination within a radius, (iii) common professional background, are generic data processing steps that help carry out the abstract idea. However, these steps can reasonably be interpreted to encapsulate the scope of instructions or steps instructions to facilitate “managing personal behavior, interactions, or relationships between people.” The limitations in bold do not necessarily require technology to perform, and therefore part of the abstract idea.
The examiner also notes that in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C), “Other examples of managing personal behavior recited in a claim include: i. filtering content, BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1345-46, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 2016).” Therefore, the filtering of the user cards in the present claims, and the accompanying steps of filtering are also part of the abstract idea.
Therefore, representative claims 1, 11, and 20 are directed to an abstract idea and are to be further analyzed under Prong 2.
Step 2a Prong: Claims 1, 11, and 20 include the following additional elements which do not integrate the claims into a practical application:
(a)- A platform in claim 1, & 11
(b)- at least one user computing device in operable connection with a user network in claim 1, & 11
(c)- an application server in operable communication with the user network in claim 1, & 11
(d)- the application server configured to host an application system for providing a communication platform in claim 1, & 11
(e)- a user interface module in claim 1, & 11
(f)- a matching module in claim 1, 11, and 20
(g)- application program in claim 1, &11
(h)-a communication module in claim 1, &11
(i)- card module in claim 11
(j)- event module in claim 11
(k)- an expert module in claim 11
(l)- a business module in claim 11
(m)- a database engine in claim 11
(n)- a user module in claim 20
(p) - a secure, real-time messaging interface integrated with the application system in claim 1
(q)- through an integrated content interface; in claim 11
(r)- hosted on an application server in claim 20
(s)- through a graphical user interface on the user computing device. In claim 20
Additional elements (a) through (s) are not considered to have integrated the abstract idea into a practical application because they merely recite components being used as a tool to execute the abstract idea, recited at such a high-level of generality (i.e., a generic processor performing a generic computer function of communicating data between users) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computing component. For example, abstract idea of providing a communication platform for work relocation, general relocation, or travel is merely instructed to be performed on generic computing components such as “at least one user computing device in operable connection with a user network; an application server in operable communication with the user network, the application server configured to host an application system” and a graphical user interface. Accordingly, the modules have been interpreted under 112f to be reciting a scope that includes generic components found in the disclosure to perform the functional limitation prescribed to them, therefore they are also not integrated into a practical application. These modules are merely performing the functional limitations of the abstract idea, and are therefore merely software instructions performed on generic computing components. Please see MPEP 2106.05(f) for more guidance.
In addition, the additional elements application program and interfaces are also found to generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. In this case the abstract idea of matching users with other users or businesses is generally being linked to application programs and user interfaces. Performing messaging, content sharing, and data display on a user interface does not meaningfully limit the claims more than generally linking the abstract idea to field of user interfaces. Therefore, even when considered individually or as an ordered combination, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Please see MPEP 2106.05(h) for more guidance.
Step 2B: The following are the additional limitations which do not result in the claim amounting to significantly more than the identified judicial exception:
(a)- A platform in claim 1, & 11
(b)- at least one user computing device in operable connection with a user network in claim 1, & 11
(c)- an application server in operable communication with the user network in claim 1, & 11
(d)- the application server configured to host an application system for providing a communication platform in claim 1, & 11
(e)- a user interface module in claim 1, & 11
(f)- a matching module in claim 1, 11, and 20
(g)- application program in claim 1, &11
(h)-a communication module in claim 1, &11
(i)- card module in claim 11
(j)- event module in claim 11
(k)- an expert module in claim 11
(l)- a business module in claim 11
(m)- a database engine in claim 11
(n)- a user module in claim 20
(p) - a secure, real-time messaging interface integrated with the application system in claim 1
(q)- through an integrated content interface; in claim 11
(r)- hosted on an application server in claim 20
(s)- through a graphical user interface on the user computing device. In claim 20
These have not been found to amount to significantly more in order to promote the abstract idea into an inventive concept for the same reasons set forth in the Prong 2 rejection. Particularly because they are found to generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use or they merely recite components being used as a tool to execute the abstract idea, recited at such a high-level of generality (i.e., a generic processor performing a generic computer function of communicating data between users) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computing component. This does not sufficiently limit the claim because simply performing the functions of the claim limitation on generic computing devices, or utilizing general fields such as application programming and databases does not add significantly more. Please see MPEP 2106.05(f) and MPEP 2106.05(h) for more guidance.
Dependent claims 2-10, and 12-19 are analyzed individually, and in combination with the claims they depend upon, under the full 2 step approach as follows:
Claims 2-4 and 12-14 merely further limit the abstract idea by specifying the “user-input parameters” therefore it is more of the same abstract idea of matching users because it is still directed to managing personal behavior, as well as, marketing, advertisement, and sales activities even when substituting the parameters such as “date, location, etc.” There are no additional elements to consider therefore the abstract idea has not been integrated into a practical application nor does it amount to significantly more in order to consider it an inventive concept.
Claim 5 and 15 merely specify that the communication module allows users to securely transmit messages prior, during, or after their end date. This additional step is a further embellishment of the same abstract idea set forth because it continues to manage social activities, or marketing, advertising, and sales activities. Constraining the time in which the individuals can communicate does not transform the abstract idea. The additional element “communication module” as set forth in claims 1 and 11, is repeated in these claims and is not found to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or found to be significantly more due to the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claims 1 and 11. There are no new additional elements to consider therefore the abstract idea has not been integrated into a practical application nor does it amount to significantly more in order to consider it an inventive concept.
Claim 6-10 and 16-19 add the additional element of a user card which is being used to display account information of an individual to other individuals on the platform. These additional steps are further embellishment of the same abstract idea set forth because it continues to manage social activities, or marketing, advertising, and sales activities. Furthermore, the additional elements of
- user card in claims 6-10, &1 6-20,
-user account in claims 6 & 16
-display module found in claim 10, or
-user image in claim 18
-user database in claim 19
are examples of generally linking the abstract idea to the field of user interfaces and displays. These have not been found to amount to significantly more in order to promote the abstract idea into an inventive concept for the same reasons set forth in the Prong 2 rejection. Particularly because they are found to generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use or they merely recite components being used as a tool to execute the abstract idea, recited at such a high-level of generality (i.e., a generic processor performing a generic computer function of communicating data between users) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computing component. This does not sufficiently limit the claim because simply performing the functions of the claim limitation on generic computing devices, or utilizing general fields such as application programming and databases does not add significantly more. Please see MPEP 2106.05(f) and MPEP 2106.05(h) for more guidance.
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, 2, 4-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Emily White (US 8812562 B2) hereinafter White, in view of Abercrombie et al. (US 20160285982 A1) hereinafter Abercrombie.
Regarding Claim 1:
White discloses facilitating the relocation of employees by matching them based on category and selection criteria. White teaches:
- A platform for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, the system comprising(White[Col. 1 Line 65 - Col 2. Line 2] Embodiments described herein provide numerous applications and implementations of a social network to facilitate individuals to resolve various life issues. These issues may include problems and concerns that arise when individuals or families travel or relocate... [Col. 9 Line 51- Col. 10 Line 8] A particular issue contemplated by embodiments of the invention includes corporate relocation assistance. A typical setting may be the military, or a corporation where new hires, transferees, business travelers, college interns, and employees (or prospective employees) are asked/required to relocate/travel from time-to-time. Under a current approach, such corporations typically have a human resource department, or other internal relocation departments who facilitate the entire arduous process of relocation. But numerous parties, both inside and outside of the company become involved in the relocation efforts, usually months before the move begins. When the person relocating has an issue, an embodiment such as described with FIG. 5 enables the person to locate the right individual to have his or her issue resolved using a simple interface.) Work relocation, general relocation, and travel are all taught by White in the citations above.
-at least one user computing device in operable connection with a user network; an application server in operable communication with the user network, (White[Col. 2 Line 58- Col. 3 Line 13] Furthermore, one or more embodiments described herein may be implemented through the use of instructions that are executable by one or more processors. These instructions may be carried on a computer-readable medium. Services and components illustrated by figures in this application provide examples of processing resources and computer-readable mediums on which instructions for implementing embodiments of the invention can be carried and/or executed. In particular, the numerous machines shown with embodiments of the invention include processor(s) and various forms of memory for holing data and instructions. Examples of computer-readable mediums include permanent memory storage devices, such as hard drives on personal computers or servers. Other examples of computer storage mediums include portable storage units, such as CD or DVD units, flash memory (such as carried on many cell phones and PDAs), and magnetic memory. A computer-readable medium as used herein may extend across multiple machines. For example, the medium may be distributed between client and server in order to perform a stated task or operation.)
-the application server configured to host an application system for providing a communication platform for work relocation, general relocation, or travel, (White(Col. 3 Lines 13-20) FIG. 1 is a block diagram depiction of a system that incorporates a social network service 110, under an embodiment of the invention. The social network service 110 may be provided by one or more modules or applications that execute on servers or other networked computers that are available to terminals. At one stage, the service 110 receives inquiries from users who inquire about a particular matter or issue.)
- the application system having a user interface module for providing access to the application system through the user computing device; (White(Col. 6 Lines 1-6) FIG. 2 illustrates components of social network service 110, according an embodiment. The components include a module 210, a user-interface (UI) 212 and a database 214 (although other forms of data storage may be used). The database 214 may be used to store information about the participants.)
-a matching module in communication with the communication platform, the matching module to match two or more users using a plurality of user-input parameters specifically related to relocation or travel; (White(Col. 5 Lines 44-60) While an embodiment shown in FIG. 1 describes a process where service 110 makes a selection of who is to receive the user’s inquiry, other embodiments may provide that no selection is made on-the-fly. Rather, a designation may be pre-existing as to which participants are to be forwarded inquiries based on category selection and/or other selection criteria provided by the user. An example of how such a variation may be implemented is described with a method of FIG. 5. Still further, another embodiment may provide that the user makes the ultimate selection of who the participants will be. In such an embodiment, the service 110 matches possible participants to the user’s category and selection criteria, and presents choices for the user... An example of such an embodiment is described with FIG. 4. [Col. 7 Lines 62- Col. 8 Lines 6] The biographical information about the participants may be stored in the database 214. An individual may supply his own biographical information for the service 110. In one example, the service may mandate a form with fields and mandatory content that the individual or participant must provide information for. Examples ... includes: (i) a picture or photo album, including one of the person who is the subject of the biography, (ii) contact information for the person, (iii) information about the person's profession or expertise, (iv) personal information, including hobbies. [Col. 14 Lines 11-13] The categories presented in the list 612 are examples of general categories needed for an individual to relocate or move into a new location.) The database 214, collected user-input through a form with fields falls within the scope of “stored in a structured format within a database.” As seen in Col. 14, these parameters are specifically related to relocation or move into a new location, which also falls under travel.
-and matched using filtering logic that requires at least one of shared relocation criteria, selected from (i) destination location within radius, (White [Col. 15 Lines 43-47] In step 730, one or more students who match the criteria of the given student are then identified. For example, the compatibility criteria of the given student may be compared against specific fields in student biographies in order to determine matches for the given student. [Col. 8 Lines 16-21] The criteria may also correspond to the category selection. Other examples of selection criteria include geographic selection. For example, in the context of people relocation, a user may wish to know about a specific category from people who reside in the location where the user is moving to.)
-(ii) target move window comprising start and end dates, or (iii) employment industry or company, (White [Col. 7 Lines 62- Col. 8 Line 6] In one example, the service may mandate a form with fields and mandatory content that the individual or participant must provide information for. Examples of content that may be included in the biographical information includes: (iii) information about the person's profession or expertise, (iv) personal information, including hobbies. [Col. 15 Lines 27-34] The form may be configurable by either one of the students, the educational establishment, and the body that makes the final decisions. Examples of what can be configured on the form include the information that an establishment or committee requires from the student. Specific examples include a picture, a major, where the student is from, what the student wishes to accomplish, a chosen career, [Col. 15 Lines 43-47] In step 730, one or more students who match the criteria of the given student are then identified. For example, the compatibility criteria of the given student may be compared against specific fields in student biographies in order to determine matches for the given student.) The claims only require at least of the relocation from the list, and White satisfies conditions (i) and (iii), therefore, the limitation has been satisfied.
-and a communication module to permit the two or more matched users to communicate using the communication platform. (White(Col. 8 Lines 32-37) Step 460 provides that a user-selection of one or more participants is received from the user through a second set of inputs. Given a set of biographies presented in step 450, the user may, for example, select one participant (based on the biography). Then in step 470, the user is enabled to communicate with the selected participant(s) over an online medium.)
through a secure, real-time messaging interface available before, during and after the target move window integrated with the application system.(White [Col. 6 Lines 24-35] In response to receiving the input through the UI 212, the module 210 selects participants using the information of the database 214. Then the module 210 sends messages 222 to selected participants, where the messages may include the inquiry content 213, or content based on the inquiry content 213. The number of messages sent 222 may be one or more. (34) In an embodiment, the module 210 may receive the bios 232 from recipients of messages 222. The module 210 then sends a compilation 242 (or aggregation) of the bios to the user. Additionally, the module or some other internal/external component may perform a step of tracking individual participants and/or the user, in order to see how well the user's problem was resolved. [Col. 8 Lines 60-63] Other examples of how subsequent communications between selected participants/individuals and the user may be performed include one or more of the following: chat room, video-conference call, telephone call (blind) etc. [Col. 8 Lines 44-52] In one variation, it is also possible to shield the identity of the participant, or the end person who will be communicating with the user. Specific examples of communications over an online medium include the following: email exchange, instant messaging, web blog (e.g. exchange of web blog URLs), video/audio broadcasts (including over data networks). It is also contemplated that communications will be possible over mediums that are not online (e.g. offline, telephone, in-person).) The limitation “available before, during and after target move window” effectively does not require a specific timeframe for messaging. Therefore, White teaching communications over an online meeting satisfies the limitation.
However, White does not teach:
- the matching module configured to operate on user cards stored in a structured database
- that the user-input parameters are captured in relocation-specific fields of the user card stored in structured format within a database
-and further configured to generate matches in advance of relocation based on overlapping date ranges; and
Alternatively, Abercrombie discloses a method of correlating events between multiple people to determine if users will be co-located at a particular vacation/travel location at the same time. Abercrombie teaches:
- the matching module configured to operate on user cards stored in a structured database (Abercrombie [0087] Referring to FIG. 8, a typical member data record 101 of the system for travelers with layovers is shown. Many possible data structures or databases are possible and known within the industry, all of which are included in the present invention. The member data record 101 is not limited to the fields shown. For example, in some embodiments, other fields are included such as work history so that a member will be able to search for other members who previously worked for the same company (e.g., the Air Force). [0088] Referring to FIGS. 8 and 9, a relationship example of several member data record of the system for travelers with layovers is shown. In this very simple example, only four members are shown although in practice, hundreds or thousands of members are expected.) Abercrombie’s member data record satisfies the “user cards stored in a structured database” limitation.
- that the user-input parameters are captured in relocation-specific fields of the user card stored in structured format within a database(Abercrombie [0087] Referring to FIG. 8, a typical member data record 101 of the system for travelers with layovers is shown. Many possible data structures or databases are possible and known within the industry, all of which are included in the present invention. The member data record 101 is not limited to the fields shown. For example, in some embodiments, other fields are included such as work history so that a member will be able to search for other members who previously worked for the same company (e.g., the Air Force). The example shown in FIG. 8 includes a user id to assist in uniquely identifying the user, a member name, a home phone number, work phone number, cell phone number, email address, home address, buddy list and preferred contact methods (e.g., by text message...) [0110] Referring to FIG. 1, a schematic view of a system for travelers with layovers is shown. In this embodiment, a schedule system 20 is external to the social network 30. A schedule system 20 is, for example, an airline personnel schedule system that assigns pilots and flight attendants to specific flight schedules. Another example of a schedule system 20 is a trucking company schedule system that assigns truckers to specific routes. Another example of a schedule system 20 is a reservation system such as an airline reservation system or general reservation system. Another example of a schedule system 20 is an itinerary organizing system such as a system that manages certain events like trade shows, conferences, sporting events, etc. In the itinerary organizing system, it is anticipated that, in some embodiments, the itinerary organizing system provides a unique event code for each event being organized. The schedule system 20 is any system that includes a scheduling capability whereby that system creates the schedule entry either through manual input, a specific event date, data from the end user (e.g., a member), etc. In some embodiments, the schedule system 20 has a set of pre-determined events, trips, concerts, meetings, etc., and the user of the schedule system 20 selects, purchases, or joins one such event. )
-and further configured to generate matches in advance of relocation based on overlapping date ranges; and (Abercrombie [0116] It is also anticipated that the event code 474 be translated into a date/time period using, for example, an event code table 470 as in FIG. 18, and the social network 30 process the date/time period as a layover as previously described. For example, in the data records 500 from FIG. 19, it is indicated that Hilary manually entered an event in which Hilary will be in Rome from 8/15/14 to 8/25/14, perhaps driving to Rome from somewhere else in Italy. There is also a record that Neil will be traveling to Rome on a flight that leaves Atlanta on 08/21/2014 (arrives in Rome on 8/22/2014). In this example, the social network 30 translates the event code DL000240082114 of Neil into a date range starting with the arrival time (not shown for clarity reasons) and ending with the next recorded date of change, in this example, the departure time from Rome of flight 241 on 09/01/2014. Therefore, from the data available, it is determined that Neil has a layover in Rome from 8/22/14 until 9/1/14. If Neil and Hilary are buddies, then this layover, overlapping with Hilary being in Rome from 8/15/14 to 8/25/14, generates a notification to Neil, Hilary, or both, depending upon preferences. Therefore, even though Hilary does not have an event code 474 associated with her visit to Rome, proper notification is performed by translating other user's event codes 474 into date ranges to determine if notification is to be made for an overlapping date range. [0127] Now, after the coordinates are calculated and the date range 706 is obtained from the user, the layover location and date range 706 are searched for any overlaps such as an overlap with another user (buddy) shown as a second icon of a push pin 704.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify White by adding Abercrombie’s structured database with user cards and specific fields such as travel date ranges. By placing White’s user-inputted parameters into Abercrombie’s data structure, one would expect the combination to predictably yield the limitations above, because Abercrombie’s matching algorithms would also work on White’s relocation parameters. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine by the benefit of increasing morale by providing an optimized way for traveling users to meet when they have overlapping dates at a location. (White [0058] The system for travelers with layovers has many benefits. For example, the system for travelers with layovers provides information to travelers to optimize their free time when on layovers, improving employee morale. Airlines use of the system for travelers with layovers provides improved employee morale and, in some circumstances, is used to determine when compatible flight crews/flight attendants are on common layovers.)
Regarding Claim 11:
White teaches:
- A platform for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, the system comprising: (White[Col. 9 Line 51- Col. 10 Line 8] A particular issue contemplated by embodiments of the invention includes corporate relocation assistance. A typical setting may be the military, or a corporation where new hires, transferees, business travelers, college interns, and employees (or prospective employees) are asked/required to relocate/travel from time-to-time. Under a current approach, such corporations typically have a human resource department, or other internal relocation departments who facilitate the entire arduous process of relocation. But numerous parties, both inside and outside of the company become involved in the relocation efforts, usually months before the move begins. When the person relocating has an issue, an embodiment such as described with FIG. 5 enables the person to locate the right individual to have his or her issue resolved using a simple interface.)
- at least one user computing device in operable connection with a user network; an application server in operable communication with the user network, (White[Col. 2 Line 58- Col. 3 Line 13] Furthermore, one or more embodiments described herein may be implemented through the use of instructions that are executable by one or more processors. These instructions may be carried on a computer-readable medium. Services and components illustrated by figures in this application provide examples of processing resources and computer-readable mediums on which instructions for implementing embodiments of the invention can be carried and/or executed. In particular, the numerous machines shown with embodiments of the invention include processor(s) and various forms of memory for holing data and instructions. Examples of computer-readable mediums include permanent memory storage devices, such as hard drives on personal computers or servers. Other examples of computer storage mediums include portable storage units, such as CD or DVD units, flash memory (such as carried on many cell phones and PDAs), and magnetic memory. A computer-readable medium as used herein may extend across multiple machines. For example, the medium may be distributed between client and server in order to perform a stated task or operation.)
-the application server configured to host an application system for providing a communication platform for work relocation, general relocation, (White(Col. 3 Lines 13-20) FIG. 1 is a block diagram depiction of a system that incorporates a social network service 110, under an embodiment of the invention. The social network service 110 may be provided by one or more modules or applications that execute on servers or other networked computers that are available to terminals. At one stage, the service 110 receives inquiries from users who inquire about a particular matter or issue.)
-the application system having a user interface module for providing access to the application system through the user computing device; (White(Col. 6 Lines 1-6) FIG. 2 illustrates components of social network service 110, according an embodiment. The components include a module 210, a user-interface (UI) 212 and a database 214 (although other forms of data storage may be used). The database 214 may be used to store information about the participants.)
-a matching module in communication with the communication platform, the matching module to match two or more users using a plurality of user-input parameters, (White(Col. 5 Lines 44-60) While an embodiment shown in FIG. 1 describes a process where service 110 makes a selection of who is to receive the user’s inquiry, other embodiments may provide that no selection is made on-the-fly. Rather, a designation may be pre-existing as to which participants are to be forwarded inquiries based on category selection and/or other selection criteria provided by the user. An example of how such a variation may be implemented is described with a method of FIG. 5. Still further, another embodiment may provide that the user makes the ultimate selection of who the participants will be. In such an embodiment, the service 110 matches possible participants to the user’s category and selection criteria, and presents choices for the user. No communication is sent to the participants until after the user has selected from the choices. The choices may be provided in the form of a listing of biographical information. An example of such an embodiment is described with FIG. 4.)
-and provided on a user card associated with each of the two or more users, the user card generated via a card module configured to receive the plurality of user-input parameters; (White(Col. 14 Lines 50-57) FIG. 6D illustrates an example of a biography 660 that can be returned as part of a response. In one embodiment (such as described with FIG. 3), the biography 660 is returned by the respondent, possibly along with a response to an issue that the user had inquired about. In another embodiment such as described in FIG. 4, the biography 660 is stored in database 214 and returned by the service 110 when an inquiry includes selection criteria contained in the biography. ) In the above citation, the profile containing the biography in White teaches the user card of the present disclosure. We know this to be true because the biography contains the selection criteria, which teaches “receive the plurality of user-input parameters” in the above limitation.
- the parameters including relocation-specific criteria selected from the group consisting of (White(Col. 5 Lines 44-60) While an embodiment shown in FIG. 1 describes a process where service 110 makes a selection of who is to receive the user’s inquiry, other embodiments may provide that no selection is made on-the-fly. Rather, a designation may be pre-existing as to which participants are to be forwarded inquiries based on category selection and/or other selection criteria provided by the user. An example of how such a variation may be implemented is described with a method of FIG. 5. Still further, another embodiment may provide that the user makes the ultimate selection of who the participants will be. In such an embodiment, the service 110 matches possible participants to the user’s category and selection criteria, and presents choices for the user... An example of such an embodiment is described with FIG. 4. [Col. 7 Lines 62- Col. 8 Lines 6] The biographical information about the participants may be stored in the database 214. An individual may supply his own biographical information for the service 110. In one example, the service may mandate a form with fields and mandatory content that the individual or participant must provide information for. Examples ... includes:) The database 214, collected user-input through a form with fields falls within the scope of “structured database.” As seen in Col. 14, these parameters are specifically related to relocation or move into a new location, which also falls under travel.
-(i) destination location within a radius, (White [Col. 8 Lines 16-21] The criteria may also correspond to the category selection. Other examples of selection criteria include geographic selection. For example, in the context of people relocation, a user may wish to know about a specific category from people who reside in the location where the user is moving to. (White [Col. 15 Lines 43-47] In step 730, one or more students who match the criteria of the given student are then identified. For example, the compatibility criteria of the given student may be compared against specific fields in student biographies in order to determine matches for the given student. [Col. 8 Lines 16-21] The criteria may also correspond to the category selection. Other examples of selection criteria include geographic selection. For example, in the context of people relocation, a user may wish to know about a specific category from people who reside in the location where the user is moving to. ) The destination region is “the location where the user is moving to” in White. The relocation type is a “specific category.”
- (ii) target move window comprising start and end dates, or (iii) employment industry or company, and (White [Col. 7 Lines 62- Col. 8 Line 6] In one example, the service may mandate a form with fields and mandatory content that the individual or participant must provide information for. Examples of content that may be included in the biographical information includes: (iii) information about the person's profession or expertise, (iv) personal information, including hobbies. [Col. 15 Lines 27-34] The form may be configurable by either one of the students, the educational establishment, and the body that makes the final decisions. Examples of what can be configured on the form include the information that an establishment or committee requires from the student. Specific examples include a picture, a major, where the student is from, what the student wishes to accomplish, a chosen career, [Col. 15 Lines 43-47] In step 730, one or more students who match the criteria of the given student are then identified. For example, the compatibility criteria of the given student may be compared against specific fields in student biographies in order to determine matches for the given student.) As a part of the user profile in White, career and profession are taught as fields in which users can find compatible roommates for relocation. Professional background is mapped to “professional” or “career” in White.
-a communication module to permit the two or more matched users to communicate using the communication platform through a real-time messaging interface; (White(Col. 8 Lines 32-37) Step 460 provides that a user-selection of one or more participants is received from the user through a second set of inputs. Given a set of biographies presented in step 450, the user may, for example, select one participant (based on the biography). Then in step 470, the user is enabled to communicate with the selected participant(s) over an online medium. [Col. 8 Line 46-52] Specific examples of communications over an online medium include the following: email exchange, instant messaging, web blog (e.g. exchange of web blog URLs), video/audio broadcasts (including over data networks). It is also contemplated that communications will be possible over mediums that are not online (e.g. offline, telephone, in-person).)
-an event module to display on or more user-input events on the user card, the events associated with relocation-related activities; (White(Col. 6 Lines 46-61) In step 320, a user-interface is provided that displays a plurality of categories in a selectable manner. An example of a user-interface is provided with FIGS. 6A-6D. The selectable categories may, for example, be provided in the form of a combination of icons and pull-down menus. In addition to categories, there may also be choices for sub-categories. For example, the user may select “home”, then be presented a list of options such as “packing and moving”, “schools” and “elder care”. From those choices, the user may select “packing and moving”. Through the user-interface, the user can select a category and enter the inquiry. This may involve the user using a mouse or pointer to select menu items and categories until an appropriate category is selected. In one embodiment, this causes a message to be generated on the user’s terminal. The user can enter his inquiry through text (or perhaps voice input), then send the message.) The user has interpreted the posts consisting of sub-categories to teach the user-input events in the claim, for example “packing and moving” would be an example of a user-input event. “Packing and moving” is also an event “associated with relocation related activities.”
-an expert module in operable communication with the application program to permit an expert to upload media content to be provided to the user, (White(Col. 8 Lines 41-52) The service 110 may handle the request by forwarding the request to the identified participants. In such an embodiment, an email address or other contact information may be shielded from the user. In one variation, it is also possible to shield the identity of the participant, or the end person who will be communicating with the user. Specific examples of communications over an online medium include the following: email exchange, instant messaging, web blog (e.g. exchange of web blog URLs), video/audio broadcasts (including over data networks). It is also contemplated that communications will be possible over mediums that are not online (e.g. offline, telephone, in-person). (White Col. 9 Lines 41-52) teaches the operable communication limitation of the present disclosure, which allows media content such as video/audio broadcasts to be uploaded by any individual including the issue resolvers in White.
-the expert module in operable communication with the communication module to permit the user and the expert to exchange information through an integrated content and messaging interface; (White(Col. 8 Lines 41-52) The service 110 may handle the request by forwarding the request to the identified participants. In such an embodiment, an email address or other contact information may be shielded from the user. In one variation, it is also possible to shield the identity of the participant, or the end person who will be communicating with the user. Specific examples of communications over an online medium include the following: email exchange, instant messaging, web blog (e.g. exchange of web blog URLs), video/audio broadcasts (including over data networks). It is also contemplated that communications will be possible over mediums that are not online (e.g. offline, telephone, in-person). (Col. 9 Lines 6-16) In step 510, an association between a plurality of issue resolvers and a plurality of issue categories is maintained. An issue resolver may correspond to a participant (an individual or other entity) who is known to be able to handle, and perhaps resolve issues of a specific nature. Individual issue resolvers may be associated with issue categories, so that one category selection in a subsequent step automatically identifies at least one participant who is known to be able to resolve the issue...[Col. 13 Lines 48-56] additional role of service 510 is to execute processes where communications (e.g. inquiries 512 and responses 514) are passed between user 502 and Connection 1 520. The service may also maintain the profiles 532, execute protocols to maintain the connections in blind form, and perform other functions such as enable programmatic invitations, and on-line communication mediums for enabling back and forth communications such as described.) In the above citation, the issue resolver in White, is the “expert” in the expert module of the present disclosure. Col. 13 shows that the information is exchanged through an integrated content interface, since the service executes the communication processes, not just sending a link to a third party communication platform. Therefore, the video-audio broadcast in Col. 8, would be an example of integrated content interface.
-a business module in operable communication with the application program to permit a business to upload content to be provided to the user, the business module in operable communication with the communication module to permit the user and the business to exchange information through the communication platform; (White(Col. 8 Lines 41-52) The service 110 may handle the request by forwarding the request to the identified participants. In such an embodiment, an email address or other contact information may be shielded from the user. In one variation, it is also possible to shield the identity of the participant, or the end person who will be communicating with the user. Specific examples of communications over an online medium include the following: email exchange, instant messaging, web blog (e.g. exchange of web blog URLs), video/audio broadcasts (including over data networks). It is also contemplated that communications will be possible over mediums that are not online (e.g. offline, telephone, in-person)…(Col. 2 Lines 16-17) The participants may correspond to individuals, organizations, or groups…(Col. 3 Lines 53-57) An example of an organization is a chamber of commerce, with individuals who work for or owning businesses being participants of the organization. Another example of an organization is an entity that has associated individuals as employees.) The citations above show that participants in the interface can be organizations such as businesses, and (White Col. 9 Lines 41-52) teaches the operable communication limitation of the present disclosure, which allows media content such as video/audio broadcasts to be uploaded by any individual including the issue resolvers in White. We know from Col. 13 Lines 48-56, that these communications are performed internally on the communication platform.
-and a database engine configured to index and search a listing of one or more of the experts and one or more of the businesses (White [Col. 11 Lines 41-53] Biographies of individuals may be stored and associated with specific categories and issues. For example, individuals may enter their biography or personal information for use with service 110. When the user presents the issue to the service 110, the service provides matching biographies without going outside of the service. Thus, in the example provided above, the service 110 may provide a list of individuals whom the service 110 has identified internally as being candidates for responding to questions about local business laws. The biographies provide the spouse the ability to see who has the most potential for responding to her question about running a local floral shop. (Col. 14 Line 58- Col. 15 Line 7) ... In the examples provided, the biographies 670 are searchable, and include email addresses (or IM tags or other contact information) to enable the individuals behind the biographies to meet one another... (Col. 9 Lines 15-16) The association between the issue resolvers and the categories may be stored in the form of data (e.g. metadata) in database 214...(Col. 2 Lines 16-17) The participants may correspond to individuals, organizations, or groups…(Col. 3 Lines 53-57) An example of an organization is a chamber of commerce, with individuals who work for or owning businesses being participants of the organization. Another example of an organization is an entity that has associated individuals as employees.) Biography information being stored on a database is an example of the information being “indexed.” As seen in subsequent paragraphs, this information includes experts(issue resolvers) and business information(candidates for responding to questions about local business laws).
-using the keyword and categorical filters to allow a user to search a listing of one or more of the experts and one or more of the businesses. (White [Col. 16 Line 22-24] The user can search the database for an issue resolver and make a Connection 1 520. [Col. 14 Lines 8-27] In FIG. 6A, an interface 610 is presented for a user to (i) select a category and (ii) input an inquiry. The interface 610 may provide a list 612 of categories, each selectable through a menu or iconic feature. The categories presented in the list 612 are examples of general categories needed for an individual to relocate or move into a new location. A selected category 614 is illustrated as being "Multi-Cultural/Church." A text field 616 provides a feature in which a user may enter his or her inquiry related to the selected category 614...One or more genre fields 620 may be provided that provide more category lists, each including additional categories that are identified are sorted on some other general topic heading. For example, a cultural genre may list categories that pertain to cultural issues for individuals relocating to a new place. Categories in different genre's may overlap or be personalized. For example, select categories from different genre's that are particularly pertinent to a user may be listed in one genre "Emily's Club". FIG. 6B illustrates an electronic form 625 for a user to submit a category-specific inquiry,) White allows for text-related inquiries and category specific inquiries to search the specific experts or businesses in the excerpt above.
-and to return expert or business results constrained by the user’s destination. (White [Col. 14 Lines 28-40] FIG. 6B illustrates an electronic form 625 for a user to submit a category-specific inquiry, according to an embodiment. In an example provided by FIG. 6B, the context of the form is relocation. The form may be filled out by anyone seeking to relocate to a new city, for example. The form 625 may include a location field 630 for a user to enter his or her location, a topic field (e.g. "Schools") for the user to enter the topic or category of his inquiry, a work location field 634 and a zone field 636 for the user to enter additional geographic information, a message subject heading 638 and a text body 640 where the user can enter his inquiry or issue ("Hello I need a referral to a school that can assist my 10 year old deaf child."). [Col. 11 Lines 25-38] The response that the spouse may receive may be in the form of a one-to-one personal response. The service 110 may be pre-configured so that the respondents/participants in a particular location are individuals who can provide a personalized response and be available for subsequent communications. If the response requires information from others who can help, it is possible for the user's inquiry to be forwarded to others within that organization or outside of that organization who will also send their bios. The result is that the spouse, who may be located in Germany, is networked to individuals who can establish answers to her issues, assist her relocation on a personal and/or professional level, and perhaps include the spouse/family in a growing social network of trusted contacts for the particular location.)
However, White fails to teach:
- and persist them (the user-input parameters) in a structured database for algorithmic filtering,
-further configured to generate matches in advance of relocation based on overlapping date ranges;
---to return expert or business results constrained by the user’s destination and timeframe.
Alternatively, Abercrombie teaches:
- and persist them (the user-input parameters) in a structured database for algorithmic filtering, (Abercrombie [0103] In general, the hard disk 240 may be used to store programs, executable code and data persistently, [0059] The schedule system 20 is any system that includes a scheduling capability whereby that system creates the schedule entry either through manual input, a specific event date, data from the end user (e.g., a member), etc. [0084] Referring to FIG. 6A, a fourth exemplary flow chart 72 of finding matches for member's buddies in the system for travelers with layovers is shown. This part of the method operates when a member is found in the layover data (see FIGS. 5 and 5A). The member's buddy list is retrieved 80 (from the social network database 34). For each buddy on the list 82, the layover data is searched for the buddy 85 having the same layover and/or matching event code (e.g., both the member and buddy will be at the same location for an overlapping time period and/or will have a matching event code indicating, for example, both are attending the same event). If the buddy is not found in the layover data 86 (having the same layover place and date, and/or event code as the member), then, if no more buddies exist 92, the flow is complete. [0090] In some embodiments, mechanisms are provided to make sure only one notification is sent to each member for a specific layover. For example, a match for David-Graham is a duplicate of a match for Graham-David. One method to prevent duplicate notifications is to save a record of the notification in a table/database and before sending a notification, consult that table/database to see if it was previously sent. For example, when David's notification is sent, the layover match will be recorded as 00100.00102.LAX.20070901 (low member user ID first) so that when the methods find Graham's buddy list and finds David as a match, it will not send another notification because the second match will also be tagged as 00100.00102.LAX.20070901 (low member user ID first).)
-further configured to generate matches in advance of relocation based on overlapping date ranges; (Abercrombie [0120] In some such user interfaces 600, a list of future travel is summarized in a status box 602 for the user to see upcoming events, layovers, etc. It is also anticipated that the user have abilities to delete or edit entries within the status box 602. [0124] In the exemplary user interface of FIGS. 24 through 26, the user is provided with an icon representing a push-pin 702. This push-pin 702 is dragged by the user to establish a location at which the user will be located at some time in the future. In FIG. 24, no push-pins 702 have been placed on the map 700. In FIG. 25, a push-pin 702A has been dragged and dropped on the map 700 in the location at which the user will be at some time in the future (e.g., Rome in this example). [0127] Now, after the coordinates are calculated and the date range 706 is obtained from the user, the layover location and date range 706 are searched for any overlaps such as an overlap with another user (buddy) shown as a second icon of a push pin 704.) In Abercrombie, users can generate matches based on future dates overlapping. The broadest reasonable interpretation of “relocation” encapsulates any form of changing location, including travel, and is not necessarily limited to “work relocation.” Therefore, Abercrombie’s system which checks if individuals such as airplane employees have overlapping layovers with other airline employees satisfies the limitation.
---to return expert or business results constrained by the user’s destination and timeframe(Abercrombie [0005] For the more business focused, web sites such as Linkedin.com emerged to provide online business networking. Such a network provides secure access and a system that mimics business relationship networking. For example, once you are invited to become linked to an associate (or buddy) member and accept, you have the ability to keep in contact with that associate, plus, if other associates of your direct associate allow, you will be able to network with them as well. [0121] For each buddy on the list 682, the layover data is searched 685 for the buddy having either the same event code 474 or having an overlapping layover (e.g., both the member and buddy will be at the same location for an overlapping time period or have a matching event code indicating, for example, both are attending the same event).) White teaches expert or business results constrained by a user’s destination but not constrained by a timeframe. Abercrombie teaches business results constrained by a timeframe as well.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify White by adding Abercrombie’s structured database with user cards and specific fields such as travel date ranges. By placing White’s user-inputted parameters into Abercrombie’s data structure, one would expect the combination to predictably yield the limitations above, because Abercrombie’s matching algorithms would also work on White’s relocation parameters. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine by the benefit of increasing morale by providing an optimized way for traveling users to meet when they have overlapping dates at a location. (White [0058] The system for travelers with layovers has many benefits. For example, the system for travelers with layovers provides information to travelers to optimize their free time when on layovers, improving employee morale. Airlines use of the system for travelers with layovers provides improved employee morale and, in some circumstances, is used to determine when compatible flight crews/flight attendants are on common layovers.)
Regarding Claim 20:
White teaches:
-A method for matching users in the process of work relocation, general relocation, the system comprising(White(Col. 1 Line 65- Col. 2 Line 9) Embodiments described herein provide numerous applications and implementations of a social network to facilitate individuals to resolve various life issues. These issues may include problems and concerns that arise when individuals or families travel or relocate. These issues include logistic problems, problems arising with assimilating family members in a community, and, in certain context, roommate pairings. As will be described, embodiments described herein greatly facilitate corporations in relocating their employees logistically, and also assist employees and their families with life issues that may determine whether the employees’ relocation will be a success.):
-generating, via a user module hosted on an application server, a user account associated with a first user; inputting, via each user, a plurality of user information, the user information stored in a structured user database, (White(Col. 12 Lines 34-43) one embodiment provides that Connection 2 530 logs onto the system and creates a profile 532, or at least provides some sort of information about himself. The profile 532 is then associated with the particular issue in question and is stored by a database 525. The profile 532 is then returned by the service 110 to the user for the user’s consideration. [Col. 12 Lines 12-14] In FIG. 5B, a social network is established by a server-side system 510, to which a user 520 (through client terminal) connects with. [Col. 7 Lines 62- Col. 8 Lines 6] The biographical information about the participants may be stored in the database 214. An individual may supply his own biographical information for the service 110. In one example, the service may mandate a form with fields and mandatory content that the individual or participant must provide information for. Examples ... includes: (i) a picture or photo album, including one of the person who is the subject of the biography, (ii) contact information for the person, (iii) information about the person's profession or expertise, (iv) personal information, including hobbies.) The database being formed from a form with mandatory with mandatory fields falls within the broad scope of “structured database,” since no specific structure has been disclosed in the claims.
-the plurality of user information associated with the user account to create a user card associated with each user,(White(Col. 12 Lines 34-43) one embodiment provides that Connection 2 530 logs onto the system and creates a profile 532, or at least provides some sort of information about himself. The profile 532 is then associated with the particular issue in question and is stored by a database 525. The profile 532 is then returned by the service 110 to the user for the user’s consideration.) The user profile with the biographical information falls within the scope of “user card,” since a user card merely describes a display of the user’s profile information.
- the user information including relocation-specific fields selected from destination location, and (White [Col. 15 Lines 43-47] In step 730, one or more students who match the criteria of the given student are then identified. For example, the compatibility criteria of the given student may be compared against specific fields in student biographies in order to determine matches for the given student. [Col. 8 Lines 16-21] The criteria may also correspond to the category selection. Other examples of selection criteria include geographic selection. For example, in the context of people relocation, a user may wish to know about a specific category from people who reside in the location where the user is moving to.)
-relocation category; (White [Col. 8 Lines 16-21]The criteria may also correspond to the category selection. Other examples of selection criteria include geographic selection. For example, in the context of people relocation, a user may wish to know about a specific category from people who reside in the location where the user is moving to.)
-associating, via an event module, at least one relocation event with the user card, each including at least a destination region; (White [Col. 6 Lines 13-17] In one embodiment, the UI 212 enables the user to enter the inputs for creating inquiry 108, and these inputs are subsequently processed by the module 210. In one embodiment, the inputs include (1) category/topic specification 211 (2) inquiry content 213. [Col. 6 Lines 46-61] In step 320, a user-interface is provided that displays a plurality of categories in a selectable manner. An example of a user-interface is provided with FIGS. 6A-6D. The selectable categories may, for example, be provided in the form of a combination of icons and pull-down menus. In addition to categories, there may also be choices for sub-categories. For example, the user may select “home”, then be presented a list of options such as “packing and moving”, “schools” and “elder care”. From those choices, the user may select “packing and moving”. Through the user-interface, the user can select a category and enter the inquiry. This may involve the user using a mouse or pointer to select menu items and categories until an appropriate category is selected. [Col. 8 Lines 16-21] The criteria may also correspond to the category selection. Other examples of selection criteria include geographic selection. For example, in the context of people relocation, a user may wish to know about a specific category from people who reside in the location where the user is moving to.) The BRI of “one relocation event with the user card” is any time-based event associated with a user profile, therefore, a user creating inquiry 108 in White satisfies the limitation because the user creates an inquiry for a particular event, including the destination location (location where the user is moving to).
- filtering, via a matching module operating on the application server, one or more user cards (White(Col. 8 Lines 22-28) In step 440, participants are identified based on the category and selection criteria, and whether or not the respective participants biographical information includes the category and/or selection criteria. In an embodiment such as described with FIG. 2, this step may be performed by module 210, as it accesses information contained in database 214 using input received from the user through UI 212.)
- based on shared criteria including event location, or user profile similarity; (White(Col. 8 Lines 29-31) In step 450, the participants that match the category and selection criteria are presented to the user. The presentation of the participants may again be done through the UI 212. [Col. 14 Line 33-38] The form 625 may include a location field 630 for a user to enter his or her location, a topic field (e.g. "Schools") for the user to enter the topic or category of his inquiry, a work location field 634 and a zone field 636 for the user to enter additional geographic information, [Col. 14 Lines 59-62] The example provided includes biography 670 for a hobbyist (paintball) and a biography 680 for a teenager. In the latter case, the teenager biography 680 may be stored with other similar biographies.) Col. 14 shows “user profile similarity,” in the form of storing similar biographies.
-and displaying the filtered one or more user cards to at least a second user (White(Col. 8 Lines 29-31) In step 450, the participants that match the category and selection criteria are presented to the user. The presentation of the participants may again be done through the UI 212.)
-through a graphical user interface on the user computing device. (White [Col. 4 Lines 29-33] As shown by another embodiment, service 110 may display a user-interface that includes multiple category listings, and the user 102 may select from the category listings a category. (Col. 3 Lines 15-22) The social network service 110 may be provided by one or more modules or applications that execute on servers or other networked computers that are available to terminals. At one stage, the service 110 receives inquiries from users who inquire about a particular matter or issue. At another stage, the service 110 has available to it participants at various geographic locations.)
-enabling secure real-time messaging between matched user before, during, and after the target move window. (White [Col. 6 Lines 24-35] In response to receiving the input through the UI 212, the module 210 selects participants using the information of the database 214. Then the module 210 sends messages 222 to selected participants, where the messages may include the inquiry content 213, or content based on the inquiry content 213. The number of messages sent 222 may be one or more. (34) In an embodiment, the module 210 may receive the bios 232 from recipients of messages 222. The module 210 then sends a compilation 242 (or aggregation) of the bios to the user. Additionally, the module or some other internal/external component may perform a step of tracking individual participants and/or the user, in order to see how well the user's problem was resolved. [Col. 8 Lines 60-63] Other examples of how subsequent communications between selected participants/individuals and the user may be performed include one or more of the following: chat room, video-conference call, telephone call (blind) etc. [Col. 8 Lines 44-52] In one variation, it is also possible to shield the identity of the participant, or the end person who will be communicating with the user. Specific examples of communications over an online medium include the following: email exchange, instant messaging, web blog (e.g. exchange of web blog URLs), video/audio broadcasts (including over data networks). It is also contemplated that communications will be possible over mediums that are not online (e.g. offline, telephone, in-person).) The limitation “available before, during and after target move window” effectively does not require a specific timeframe for messaging. Therefore, White teaching communications over an online meeting satisfies the limitation.
However, White does not teach:
-relocation-specific fields selected from timeframe
-that the filtering one or more user cards is based on shared criteria including date event location, date, or user profile similarity by requiring at least one of (i) overlapping event date windows, (ii) destination within a radius, or (iii) common professional background; and
-that the relocation event associated with the user card also includes a start and end date;
Alternatively, Abercrombie teaches:
-relocation-specific fields selected from timeframe (Abercrombie [0116] For example, in the data records 500 from FIG. 19, it is indicated that Hilary manually entered an event in which Hilary will be in Rome from 8/15/14 to 8/25/14, perhaps driving to Rome from somewhere else in Italy.)
-that the filtering one or more user cards is based on shared criteria including event location, date, or user profile similarity (Abercrombie [0078] It is fully anticipated that, in some embodiments, data entry personnel enter locations, dates, times, and identifications into the system 20/20A as is anticipated where the source of layover data is, for example, a scheduling system. In such embodiments, or in other embodiments, it is also anticipated that individual users enter locations, dates, times (and implied identification through login credentials), which is stored in the schedule/event database 32 and used to determine matching layovers. Examples of a user entering layover data is described in FIGS. 24 through 26. [0085] Referring to FIG. 6B, a fifth exemplary flow chart 72 of finding matches for member's buddies in the system for travelers with layovers is shown.) Event location, and date are taught in [0078] and matching is taught in [0085] which satisfies “user profile similarity.
-by requiring at least one of (i) overlapping event date windows, (ii) destination within a radius, or (iii) common professional background; and(Abercrombie [See 0062 for overlapping event date windows] In the above examples, if a member only wants to be notified if they share the same event, the member, through administrative tools, informs the system of such and will only receive notification if the overlap includes an event, such as both are flying on the same flight or both are attending the same football game. [see 0099 for destination within a radius] In some embodiments, the coordinates 175 of the layovers are used to calculate a distance between the layovers. For example, if a first member has a layover, staying at the My Place Hotel in San Francisco from May 1 through May 7, and a second member (buddy of the first member) has a layover, staying at the Airport Hotel in San Jose from May 5 through May 10, a distance is determined between the two coordinates 175 (e.g. latitudes and longitudes) and if that distance is within a threshold (for example, 60 miles), then notification is provided.
-that the relocation event associated with the user card also includes a start and end date;(Abercrombie [0116] here is also a record that Neil will be traveling to Rome on a flight that leaves Atlanta on 08/21/2014 (arrives in Rome on 8/22/2014). In this example, the social network 30 translates the event code DL000240082114 of Neil into a date range starting with the arrival time (not shown for clarity reasons) and ending with the next recorded date of change, in this example, the departure time from Rome of flight 241 on 09/01/2014. Therefore, from the data available, it is determined that Neil has a layover in Rome from 8/22/14 until 9/1/14. If Neil and Hilary are buddies, then this layover, overlapping with Hilary being in Rome from 8/15/14 to 8/25/14, generates a notification to Neil, Hilary, or both, depending upon preferences.) Abercrombie teaches both start and end dates. The examiner notes that “relocation event” is interpreted to be any event in which a user is at a different location. Though claims are read in view of the specification, the claim language is given its plain meaning, which is not necessarily restricted to “work relocation” or “moving.” Therefore, the limitation has been taught.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify White by adding Abercrombie’s structured database with user cards and specific fields such as travel date ranges. By placing White’s user-inputted parameters into Abercrombie’s data structure, one would expect the combination to predictably yield the limitations above, because Abercrombie’s matching algorithms would also work on White’s relocation parameters. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine by the benefit of increasing morale by providing an optimized way for traveling users to meet when they have overlapping dates at a location. (White [0058] The system for travelers with layovers has many benefits. For example, the system for travelers with layovers provides information to travelers to optimize their free time when on layovers, improving employee morale. Airlines use of the system for travelers with layovers provides improved employee morale and, in some circumstances, is used to determine when compatible flight crews/flight attendants are on common layovers.)
Regarding Claims 2, 12:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 1 and claim 11:
Furthermore, White teaches:
- wherein the plurality of user-input parameters comprises a location(White[Col. 4 Lines 1-6] In an embodiment, part of the consideration that the service 110 makes in selecting what participants should receive the user inquiry 108 is based on geography. The user 102 may specify location with the inquiry, or the service 110 may make a determination as to what location to select based on other information.)
However, White fails to teach:
- wherein the plurality of user-input parameters comprises a date.
Alternatively, Abercrombie teaches:
- wherein the plurality of user-input parameters comprises a date(Abercrombie [0059] The schedule system 20 is any system that includes a scheduling capability whereby that system creates the schedule entry either through manual input, a specific event date, data from the end user (e.g., a member), etc.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify White by adding Abercrombie’s structured database with user cards and specific fields such as travel date ranges. By placing White’s user-inputted parameters into Abercrombie’s data structure, one would expect the combination to predictably yield the limitations above, because Abercrombie’s matching algorithms would also work on White’s relocation parameters. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine by the benefit of increasing morale by providing an optimized way for traveling users to meet when they have overlapping dates at a location. (White [0058] The system for travelers with layovers has many benefits. For example, the system for travelers with layovers provides information to travelers to optimize their free time when on layovers, improving employee morale. Airlines use of the system for travelers with layovers provides improved employee morale and, in some circumstances, is used to determine when compatible flight crews/flight attendants are on common layovers.)
Regarding Claim 4, 14:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 2 and claim 12:
White fails to teach:
-- wherein the date is defined as the users start date and end date of employment, travel length, or personal move date.
Alternatively, Abercrombie teaches:
- wherein the date is defined as the users start date and end date of employment, travel length, or personal move date. (Abercrombie [0116] In this example, the social network 30 translates the event code DL000240082114 of Neil into a date range starting with the arrival time (not shown for clarity reasons) and ending with the next recorded date of change, in this example, the departure time from Rome of flight 241 on 09/01/2014. Therefore, from the data available, it is determined that Neil has a layover in Rome from 8/22/14 until 9/1/14. If Neil and Hilary are buddies, then this layover, overlapping with Hilary being in Rome from 8/15/14 to 8/25/14, generates a notification to Neil, Hilary, or both, depending upon preferences.) Since the limitations only require one out of the list, and both “travel length” which is the start and end date of travel, and personal move date(which could encapsulate a date in which a user is traveling to another location), then the limitation has been satisfied.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to modify White by adding Abercrombie’s structured database with user cards and specific fields such as travel date ranges. By placing White’s user-inputted parameters into Abercrombie’s data structure, one would expect the combination to predictably yield the limitations above, because Abercrombie’s matching algorithms would also work on White’s relocation parameters. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine by the benefit of increasing morale by providing an optimized way for traveling users to meet when they have overlapping dates at a location. (White [0058] The system for travelers with layovers has many benefits. For example, the system for travelers with layovers provides information to travelers to optimize their free time when on layovers, improving employee morale. Airlines use of the system for travelers with layovers provides improved employee morale and, in some circumstances, is used to determine when compatible flight crews/flight attendants are on common layovers.)
Regarding Claims 5, 15:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 4 and claim 14.
White teaches:
-wherein the communication module is in communication with a messaging interface to the two or more matched permit users to securely transmit messages to one another prior to each user’s start date, between user’s start and end date, and after user’s end date.( (White [Col. 6 Lines 24-35] In response to receiving the input through the UI 212, the module 210 selects participants using the information of the database 214. Then the module 210 sends messages 222 to selected participants, where the messages may include the inquiry content 213, or content based on the inquiry content 213. The number of messages sent 222 may be one or more. (34) In an embodiment, the module 210 may receive the bios 232 from recipients of messages 222. The module 210 then sends a compilation 242 (or aggregation) of the bios to the user. Additionally, the module or some other internal/external component may perform a step of tracking individual participants and/or the user, in order to see how well the user's problem was resolved. [Col. 8 Lines 60-63] Other examples of how subsequent communications between selected participants/individuals and the user may be performed include one or more of the following: chat room, video-conference call, telephone call (blind) etc. [Col. 8 Lines 44-52] In one variation, it is also possible to shield the identity of the participant, or the end person who will be communicating with the user. Specific examples of communications over an online medium include the following: email exchange, instant messaging, web blog (e.g. exchange of web blog URLs), video/audio broadcasts (including over data networks). It is also contemplated that communications will be possible over mediums that are not online (e.g. offline, telephone, in-person).)) The above limitation “prior to each user’s start date, between user’s start and end date, and after user’s end date” encompasses any possible time range, therefore White teaches this limitation by providing communications at any point in time. There is no particular time based restriction to send messages in this limitation.
Regarding Claim 6, 16:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 5 and claim 15:
White further teaches
-further comprising a user module to permit the creation, via the user, of a user account. (White(Col. 2 Lines 36-39)After receiving the invitation 516, one embodiment provides that Connection 2 530 logs onto the system and creates a profile 532, or at least provides some sort of information about himself.) White’s creation of a profile on the system anticipates the “user account” limitation as claimed.
Regarding Claim 7:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 6:
White further teaches:
- wherein the user account is associated with a user card. (White(Fig. 6D) illustrates a user card in accordance with the definition of a user card in the present disclosure)A user card has been interpreted by the examiner to encompass any display of a user profile with biographical or other information about the user.
Regarding Claims 8, 17:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 7 and claim 16:
White further teaches:
-wherein the user card is comprised of a plurality of personal information and the plurality of user-input information. (White(Fig. 6D) illustrates the user card having a plurality of personal information and a plurality of user-input information)
Regarding Claim 9:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 8:
White further teaches:
-wherein the matching module selects user cards to match the two or more users. (White (Col. 15 Lines 38-61) Step 720 provides that a compatibility criteria is received from a given student. This may include one or more criteria that the given student feels is necessary for a match to be successful. Examples include musical preference and religion. In step 730, one or more students who match the criteria of the given student are then identified. For example, the compatibility criteria of the given student may be compared against specific fields in student biographies in order to determine matches for the given student. To provide a specific example, the given student may specify religion and musical preference, and other student biographies are searched for matches to those two criteria. In step 740, a forum for a given student to communicate with identified students is enabled. This forum or medium may be, for example, any one or more of the following: (i) exchange of email addresses for email communications, (ii) exchange of IM tags to enable the students to participate in online chat sessions with each other, and (iii) network addresses corresponding to individual’s web sites or blogs. Step 750 provides that student pairing selections are received from the students, including from the given student. Thus, for example, various student pairing selections may be received from an entire class of students)
Regarding Claim 10:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 9:
White further teaches:
- further comprising a display module configured to display the user card associated with a first user to a second user. (White (Col. 16 Lines 4-13) It should be noted that once students are placed in contact with one another through a matching of compatibility criteria, a service such as described in FIGS. 1 and 2 may extend a social network for the students to the friends and families of those students. For example, students may insert their biographies in database 214, their parent information, friends etc. Other students can search the biographies. Students who are compatible may be able to present biographical information about their new roommate and their roommates parents to their own parents.) In White, the biographical information is displayed to the students after a match is detected. This information is “displayed” since a user is able to present/display the other users biographical information to their own parents.
Regarding Claim 18:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 17:
White further teaches:
- wherein the user card is further comprised of at least one user image. (White (Col. 8 Lines 1-6) Examples of content that may be included in the biographical information includes: (i) a picture or photo album, including one of the person who is the subject of the biography, (ii) contact information for the person, (iii) information about the person’s profession or expertise, (iv) personal information, including hobbies.)
Regarding Claim 19:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 18:
White further teaches:
-wherein the application program is in communication with a user database to store a plurality of user account information. (White(Col. 6 Lines 1-12) FIG. 2 illustrates components of social network service 110, according an embodiment. The components include a module 210, a user-interface (UI) 212 and a database 214 (although other forms of data storage may be used). The database 214 may be used to store information about the participants. This information may include one or more of the following: the location of the respective participants, the identity of the participant, the type of entity the participant is, and what topics to consider that participant for purpose of responding to inquiries. In an embodiment such as described with FIG. 4, the database 214 may include biographies completed by the individuals who are the respondents.)
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Emily White (US 8812562 B2) hereinafter White,
in view of Abercrombie et al. (US 20160285982 A1) hereinafter Abercrombie,
further in view of workaway.info(NPL “Find a Travel Buddy”
https://web.archive.org/web/20220121023532/https://www.workaway.info/en/community/travelbuddy#expand, Published January 21, 2022) hereinafter, workaway.info
Regarding Claim 3, 13:
The combination of White, and Abercrombie teaches the system of claim 2 and claim 12 wherein:
White further teaches:
- wherein the plurality of user-input parameters further comprises a company, one or more user interests, an age, and a radius associated with the location. (White (Col. 4 Lines 9-23)The service 110 may maintain information about numerous participants, including the participants 122-128 shown, as well as the respective location of each participant. The service 110 may use the information provided by the user 102 to narrow or otherwise select participants to handle the inquiry 108. Other information that may be maintained by the service 110 includes personal information, such as biographical information of individuals. The biographical information may comprise numerous items, including for example: name, age, education, place of higher-education, career, hobbies, place of origin, music preferences, expertise and knowledge, photograph, and audio message. The biographical information may also contain information that indicates what that individual’s expertise is. [Col. 14 Lines 41-49] FIG. 6C illustrates another interface 645 that is company specific (e.g. used internally by one company or organization) to resolve relocation issues by category. A list 650 of categories may be provided, along with a text area 652 where a person may enter an issue or raise a question under a selected category. In an example provided, a recipient may be pre-designated for each category. Thus, the user's message will be routed to whoever is designated to receive issues falling under that category.) White teaches the “user interests, age, and radius associated with a location aspect of the limitations above in Col. 4 Lines 9-23. Furthermore, White teaches the “company” limitation in Col. 14 Lines 41-49 because accessing a company specific page to resolve location issues means that the company would be specified by user inputted parameters. Therefore, White teaches all of the above limitations.
However, neither White nor Abercrombie teach or suggest:
-a gender
Alternatively, workaway.info teaches:
-a gender(Workaway.info displays gender choices in the “more” tab, including the options “all,
male, or female)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the present disclosure to modify the combination of White and Abercrombie by adding the gender field from Workaway.info as it allows the users more control over their search, enhancing the system overall. It would have been obvious to try filtering by gender as it is a common criteria for individuals looking for roommates.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the following reasons.
Regarding arguments over rejections under 101, starting in page 7 of the applicant’s remarks, the applicant repeats the argument that the claims 1-20 do not recite an abstract idea, and asserts that the examiner has not established that the character of the claims as a whole are directed to a judicial exception. However, the examiner still respectfully disagrees. The claims have been bolded, separating the functional limitations from the additional elements, not as a means to perform a piece-wise analysis but to consider whether the claims merely involves a judicial exception or recites a judicial exception. Due to the subject matter of the claims and the functional steps being primarily based on subject matter that falls within the category of “certain methods of organizing human activity,” the examiner has acknowledged that the claims recite an abstract idea and require further analysis. Please see MPEP 2106.04 for more information on Step 2A. Step 2A is a 2-prong process that allows the examiner to consider both the question of whether the claim recites an abstract idea, and whether the claims recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The examiner has considered the additional elements in the context of the functional limitations, thereby viewing the claim as a whole. In page 7, the applicant asserts that the analysis under 101 should focus on whether the claims amount to significantly more than a claim upon an ineligible concept itself. However, this argument is unpersuasive, since the consideration of significantly more, is addressed in Step 2B of the rejection, not step 2a Prong 1. Therefore the applicant’s arguments remain unpersuasive.
In pages 7-8 of the applicant’s remarks, the applicant alleges that the claims have been amended to recite subject matter including additional elements that integrate the claim into a practical application and provide significantly more. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant argues “even if the Office views “matching” as reciting an abstract idea, Claim 1 integrates it into a practical application: the claim improves how the computer performs matching and messaging in an Internet-centric setting by constraining searches to normalized fields and by computationally enforcing date-window overlaps before enabling time-gated secure communications.” However, the examiner is not convinced that the alleged teachings above reflect a technical improvement because allegedly constraining searches to “normalized” fields (the word “normalized” is not found in the plain claim language) is merely equivalent to “filtering.” The MPEP explicitly provides “filtering content” as an example of “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people” in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C), which refers to BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1345-46, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1239 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (finding that filtering content was an abstract idea under step 2A). Therefore, the applicant’s argument that constraining searches to normalized fields allegedly provides an improvement is not persuasive because the constraining of fields itself is an abstract idea. Even if there was an improvement, such an improvement would be to the abstract idea itself, and not a technical improvement. MPEP 2106.05(a) states, “However, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology.” Furthermore , it would not be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that “computationally enforcing date-window overlaps before enabling time-gated secure communications” provides a technical improvement in view of the specification. Furthermore, such language does not align with the present scope of the claims as the claims only requires a real-time messaging interface before, during, or after the target move window, which encapsulates any possible time range. Therefore, the features in which the applicant builds their argument upon do not even reflect the scope of the claim. Nonetheless, such a limitation is broad enough to encapsulate any computer instructed to restrict interactions unless certain rule-based criteria are met, and is therefore, still part of the abstract idea when viewing the claim language. Therefore, even when viewed as a whole, the limitations do not reflect the alleged technical improvement as argued by the applicant, and therefore, the applicant’s remarks are not persuasive.
Furthermore, the applicant alleges that the claims address networked platform behavior and yields computer-functional improvements (reduced comparison breadth, deterministically bounded queries keyed to fields; time-gated UI behavior). However, even assuming that these features align with the scope of the claims, these alleged improvements still do not arrive at the level of a technical improvement, because reducing comparison breadth and time-gated UI behavior still falls within abstract filtering. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided a section in the claims or specification that convince one of ordinary skill that “deterministically bounded queries keyed to fields” is a technical improvement. It is not clear where the claims reflect such language and it is not mentioned in any part of the specification, therefore, these arguments are not persuasive. Regarding these alleged improvements being akin to DDR Holdings (internet centric solution), and McRO (use of specific rules to achieve a result not attainable by generic automation), neither of the improvements found in either DDR Holdings and McRO apply to the present claims. Furthermore, the applicant has not established a clear nexus between the present claims and DDR Holdings/McRo. Furthermore, the applicant argues that the claim elements confine the operation a particular machine (the claimed platform) and a specific data structure/technique integrate any recited exception into a practical application. However, this argument is not persuasive for the following reasons. MPEP 2106.05(b) states, “the particular machine consideration is a clue, It is noted that while the application of a judicial exception by or with a particular machine is an important clue, it is not a stand-alone test for eligibility...Examiners may find it helpful to evaluate other considerations such as the mere instructions to apply an exception consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)), the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)), and the field of use and technological environment consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)), when making a determination of whether an element (or combination of elements) is a particular machine. For information on the definition of the term "machine," see MPEP § 2106.03.”
The particular machine consideration does not apply to present claims because, “a general purpose computer that applies a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea, by use of conventional computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine” (MPEP 2106.05(b)(I)). Therefore, the applicant alleging that the “claimed platform” is a particular machine is not a valid argument. Please see MPEP 2106.03 for the definition of the term machine.
Regarding the applicant’s arguments over claim 11, the applicant alleges that the claims require (i) field-normalized storage to enable algorithmic filtering; which is not persuasive because it still recites filtering to a level of generality that it still merely “certain methods of organizing human activity. The applicant further alleges (ii) event-bounded constraints on search and messaging, however, the claims recite such a concept with such generality that it is no more than filtering, and restricting the ability to message based on certain rule based criteria. Finally, (iii) integrated expert/business content interfaces whose search returns are programmatically constrained to relocation parameters is still merely performing filtering (constraining to relocation parameters) broadly, whilst providing a “user interface” which is an “apply it” level additional element. Therefore, even for claim 11, the examiner is not convinced that there is a technical improvement reflected in the presently amended claim language. Furthermore, the examiner disagrees that such improvement (which is an improvement to the abstract idea of “managing personal behavior” mirrors the “improvement to computer functionality recognized in USPTO guidance particularly in McRo and DDR.
Regarding arguments over claim 20, the applicant alleges that a particular data structure (the user card with normalized relocation fields) provides integration. However, user cards with normalized fields is not recited with enough specificity to provide an improvement to data structures, it is merely reciting that the user information is normalized (name, date, etc). Similarly the (ii) particular event model is the sate filtering and overlap algorithm that has been deemed part of the abstract idea above, and (iii) particular messaging behavior is still merely rule-based filtering to restrict interactions, which is still part of the abstract idea. None of these features are recited with enough specificity to be deemed a technical improvement, and therefore, the applicant’s argument regarding “narrowing computation a communication to field-keyed and time-bounded interactions” being a practical application is not persuasive, because it merely recites generic data features such that they are still part of the abstract idea.
The examiner notes that in DDR Holdings, the claims were deemed eligible because the sequence of events triggered by the click of a hyperlink was a technical improvement at the earliest filing date of the time, which was in 1998. The analysis of a technical improvement is in regards to the filing date of the present disclosure in 2023. Merely mirroring the additional elements of cases like McRo and DDr does not lend the claims towards eligibility, because the additional elements must provide a technical improvement at the time of its filing. Furthermore according to MPEP 2106.05(a),
“If it is asserted that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. The specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, but it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies a technical problem and explains the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. For example, in McRO, the court relied on the specification’s explanation of how the particular rules recited in the claim enabled the automation of specific animation tasks that previously could only be performed subjectively by humans, when determining that the claims were directed to improvements in computer animation instead of an abstract idea.”
Therefore, when viewing the specification it is not made clear how the claims reflect an improvement to technology. Furthermore, the examiner further notes that in McRo, the technical improvement was that the particular rules extended the functionality beyond tasks that could only be performed by humans, because the abstract idea was originally “mental processes.” However, the rejection above is based on “certain methods of organizing human activity,” therefore, the functionalities that made McRo eligible, do not apply to the present claims. Therefore, none of the applicant’s arguments regarding step 2A Prong 2 are persuasive.
Regarding arguments over step 2B, the applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The applicant alleges that the ordered combination provides significantly more than well-understood, routine, conventional activity by its “particular arrangement of modules that persist structured relocation fields, compute overlapping time windows, apply radius-bounded geofilters, and enable real-time messaging specifically tied to those windows.” However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant has not provided a convincing argument that such features recite significantly more than well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Furthermore, the rejection above does not rely on an assertion in step 2B that any of the elements recite well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. The rejection above reflects that the additional elements are no more than “apply it” level elements or “generally linking,” therefore, there is no burden on the examiner to provide a factual determination that any of the elements recite well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Therefore, the examiner is not required to show Berkheimer evidence that relocation timing controls and structured card-based filtering is routine or conventional because these features still fall within the abstract idea category. MPEP 2106.05(d) states, “A factual determination is required to support a conclusion that an additional element (or combination of additional elements) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Berkheimer v. HP, Inc., 881 F.3d 1360, 1368, 125 USPQ2d 1649, 1654 (Fed. Cir. 2018). However, this does not mean that a prior art search is necessary to resolve this inquiry. Instead, examiners should rely on what the courts have recognized, or those in the art would recognize, as elements that are well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the relevant field when making the required determination. For example, in many instances, the specification of the application may indicate that additional elements are well-known or conventional.” Therefore, since the features that the applicant alleges provide significantly more are part of the abstract idea, and the rejection does not rely on assertion that any of the elements are WURC, the applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
In response to the applicant’s arguments in the conclusion on page 9, the applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because none of the features that the applicant presents as allegedly improving technology satisfy the requirements in MPEP 2106.05(a) for determining whether a technical improvement exists. More specifically, the applicant alleges that the limitations confine the claims to a specific, Internet-centric platform solution that changes how the computer stores, filters, retrieves, and enables communication rather than using a computer as a generic tool. However, the examiner does not find this persuasive because the techniques described are still part of the abstract idea. None of the steps recited in the claims actually reflect or purport an improvement to computer capabilities. The claims recite merely abstract idea improvements that invoke computers merely as a tool. Performing an improved abstract idea process of managing personal behavior, interactions, or relationships on computers between people does not qualify as a technical improvement. Any perceived increase in speed or efficiency is related to either the improved abstract idea process or comes from the capabilities of a general purpose computer. MPEP 2106.05(a)(II) states, “Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement in computer-functionality:... ii. Accelerating a process of analyzing audit log data when the increased speed comes solely from the capabilities of a general-purpose computer, FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1095, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1296 (Fed. Cir. 2016);” Therefore, none of the applicant’s arguments over 101 are persuasive and the rejection stands.
In view of arguments over rejections under 35, U.S.C. 103, the applicant’s remarks have been fully considered but are either moot or not persuasive for the following reasons. In pages 10 and 11 of the applicant’s remarks, the applicant describes each of White, Workaway and Spareroom and asserts that amended claims 1, 11, and 20 recite subject matter not taught or disclosed by White, workaway and spareroom. However, the updated rejection above is now based on a combination of White and Abercrombie. Therefore, the applicant’s arguments that the cited references fail to teach or suggest the arrangement is moot. Furthermore, on page 11 (with respect to claim 1), the applicant asserts that White is directed to resolver routing, not peer to peer matching based on structured relocation fields. Abercrombie has been cited as part of the combination to teach (in combination with White), all of the limitations, including the amended limitations allegedly not taught by White. Therefore, the applicant’s arguments regarding claim 1 are not persuasive because the updated rejection provides a combination that yields the predictable outcome of claim 1 as amended.
Regarding arguments over claim 11, the applicant argues that White does not teach the expert modules or programmatic constraints on indexing and retrieval tied to relocation parameters. While the examiner agrees that while White does teach expert/business modules, White does not specifically tie them to the structured indexing and relocation parameter retrieval limitations. However, in combination with Abercrombie, the claims are obvious over the combination because Abercrombie has been shown to teach the timeframe constraining, indexing, and database features not taught by White. Therefore, the applicant’s argument that the claimed “interplay among storage, indexing, retrieval, and communications represents a coordinated platform behavior that is absent from the cited art” is not persuasive because the combination of White and Abercrombie renders the claim obvious.
Regarding arguments over claim 20, the applicant alleges that White lacks the normalized card, event association, and required overlap rules and does not time gate messaging. While the examiner agrees that White lacks normalized cards, and required overlap rules, the argument is not persuasive because updated combination teaches the normalized card, event association and required overlap rules. Furthermore, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., time-gated messaging) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The present claim language does permit users to communicate through a real-time messaging interface, nothing in the claims requires it to be “time-gated.” For example, claim 1 says the message interface is available “before, during, and after the target move window.” This date is not time gated because the ranges encapsulate every possible range. Similarly, claim 1 does not have any time constraints related to messaging at all, and claim 20 also includes the “before, during, and after the target move window” language which encapsulates all possible timeframes, meaning that the messaging can occur at any time and is not time restricted.
Therefore, the applicant’s argument in page 12 to 13 stating, “(i) persists relocation-specific fields in structured user cards, (ii) performs rule-bound matching requiring at least one of overlapping target move windows, destination radius, or professional background, and (iii) time-gates secure real-time messaging to the computed windows, with Claim 11 further reciting expert and business modules and constrained indexing keyed to destination and timeframe. The cited art, alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest this specific architecture, data model, and control flow” is also not persuasive for the same reasons stated above. Particularly that the updated rejection is now based on a combination of White and Abercrombie which teach or suggest every limitation, and that the claim language does not reflect “time-gated secure real-time messaging.”
Regarding the remaining arguments in page 13 which center around the applicant’s allegations of a lack of motivation to combine, the argument is moot in view of the updated rejection. Regardless, the examiner that in response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the motivation to combine White and Abercrombie has been shown in the rejections above. In response to potential arguments that White and Abercrombie are nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Therefore, the requirement is that White and Abercrombie are analogous to the present disclosure, which has been shown to be the case.
Therefore, none of the applicant’s arguments over prior art are persuasive and rejection under 103 stands.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
- Fabris et al. (US 20090282342 A1) discloses method for obtaining travel information related to reservations that determines if the reservations follow certain date rules such overlapping date ranges.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICO LAUREN PADUA whose telephone number is (703)756-1978. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri: 8:30 to 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jessica Lemieux can be reached at (571) 270-3445. 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.
/NICO L PADUA/ Junior Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626
/JESSICA LEMIEUX/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626