DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the amendment filed on 02/23/2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that under the Ex Parte Desjardins Appeal the claims are not abstract. Applicant reviews Ex Parte Desjardins on page 12 of the response, discussed improvement covered in the specification on paes 13 -17, and started arguing step 2A prong 1 starting on page 17 of the response. Applicant argues that the claims being directed to “acquiring financing” is overbroad and to high of a level of generality as criticized in Desjardin.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the claims are drawn to fundamental economic practice, and the various specifics claimed. Each specific element that is abstract has been identified in the rejection below (the 101 rejection is modified for clarity below). The claims as a whole are examined and the reference to acquiring financing is to clarify how it is fundamental economic practice.
Applicant argues step 2A prong 2 starting on page 18 of the response.
Applicant argues that “The Office Action asserts that the additional elements such as "circuitry configured to: generate and display, on a user terminal of a user, an initial cash budget screen" represent "the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea" (see Office Action, page 6). This conclusion makes the same error criticized in Desjardins: treating technological components as ‘generic computer components, without adequate explanation.’”(response ty 18).
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the Desjardins decision is based on machine learning and improvement to machine learning, which are absent in the current claims. The present claims are drawn to searching for , selecting and acquiring financing. This represents fundamental economic practice and therefore is abstract. The elements that are not abstract are limited to computer components and displaying information on terminals, which represents the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea.
Applicant further argues “The Examiner further asserts that "displaying a cash budget screen including predicted future cash shortage and concluding with an 'updated cash budget screen indicating a revised future cash balance' amounts to no more than mere instruction to apply the exception" (see Office Action, page 3, citing MPEP 2106.05(f)(a)(2)). However, the Office Action does not address the full scope of what Claim 1 recites between these display steps.” (Id at 20).
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the full scope of what is claimed between these display steps is abstract as identified in the prong 1 analysis, the prong 2 analysis forces on the additional elements that are not abstract.
Applicant argues step 2B starting on page 20 of the response. Applicant it argues “The Desjardins Panel emphasized that "§§ 102, 103 and 112 are the traditional and appropriate tools to limit patent protection to its proper scope. These statutory provisions should be the focus of examination." Desjardins, Appeal No. 2024-000567, page 10. Here, there are no rejections under §§ 102 or 103. The Examiner has not identified any prior art showing that the specific combination of operations recited in the claims is conventional.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the additional elements of the claims are limited to “generating an initial cash budget screen, …, and displaying the cash budget screen on a user terminal of a user”, “…, from the user terminal of a user in response to the displayed predicted future cash shortage…”, “…from one or more external credit information server…” and “generating an updated cash budget screen, … and displaying the updating cash budget screen on the user terminal” which does not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
For at least the reasons stated above applicant’s arguments regarding 35 U.S.C. § 101 are not persuasive.
==
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 1, 8 and 9 are directed to a method, system, and non-transitory computer-readable recording medium. For the purposes of this analysis, representative claim 8 is addressed.
Claim 8 recites “acquiring financing” which is a grouped under “Certain methods of organizing human activity — fundamental economic practices” in prong one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04(a)). Abstract ideas are in bold below.
An information processing method, comprising:
generating an initial cash budget screen, including a predicted future cash shortage, and displaying the cash budget screen on a user terminal of a user;
receiving, from the user terminal in response to the displayed predicted future cash shortage, condition information indicating a user-selected priority condition for determining a financing service to be provided to the user to address the predicted future cash shortage, the condition information indicating one or more types of business transaction forms to be used for financing, each type of the business transaction forms having been issued by the user in providing a product or a service to another user identified as a business partner of the user;
obtaining one or more financing service types respectively corresponding to the one or more types of business transaction forms indicated by the condition information;
searching a plurality of financing sources using the one or more specific financing service types to obtain one or more financing source candidates of financing source each matching at least one of the one or more specific financing service types;
obtaining credit information for the business partner from one or more external credit information servers, wherein the obtained credit information is evaluated on different credibility rank scales;
adjusting the credit information to a standardized credibility rank using a credit information adjustment management database;
selecting, from the one or more financing source candidates and based on the standardized credibility rank of the business partner, a recommended set of at least one financing source based on business profile information on the user and the user-selected priority condition;
transmitting information on the recommended set of at least one financing source to the user terminal, to display of a recommendation screen presenting the recommended set of financing sources and associated financing details according to the one or more specific financing services types;
receiving, from the user terminal, a user selection confirming one or more financing sources from the recommended set; and
generating an updated cash budget screen, indicating a revised future cash balance prediction based on financing amounts from the one or more financing sources of the user selection, and displaying the updating cash budget screen on the user terminal.
The additional elements of claim 8 such as “generating an initial cash budget screen, …, and displaying the cash budget screen on a user terminal of a user”, “…, from the user terminal of a user in response to the displayed predicted future cash shortage…”, “…from one or more external credit information server…” and “generating an updated cash budget screen, … and displaying the updating cash budget screen on the user terminal” represent the use of a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or does no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. And, as the additional element does no more than provide a tool to perform an abstract idea and/or does no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use, it does computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of using generic computer components. The claim elements when considered separately and in an ordered combination, do not add significantly more than implementing the abstract idea of fundamental economic practice.
Hence, claims 1, 8 and 9 are not patent eligible.
Claim 2 recites “…information on the one or more types of business transaction forms indicated by the condition information, from among a plurality of forms having been issued by the user in providing the product or the service to the another user identified as the business partner.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the circuitry is further configured to transmit, to the user terminal,…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 3 recites “wherein the condition information indicates a condition representative of the user-selected priority condition in which the particular financing source is selected so as to minimize a service charge rate in financing, the service charge rate being determined based on the financing source and the one or more types of business transaction forms to be used for financing.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the condition information indicates a condition representative of the user-selected priority condition in which the particular financing source is selected based on credit information of the another user identified as the business partner, such that financing sources corresponding to the one or more types of business transaction forms issued to the another user identified as the business partner are prioritized for selection as part of a risk avoidance priority.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the condition information further indicates a time period selected by the user, …, as the one or more types of business transaction forms used for financing, one or more forms each having time information indicating a payment due time that falls within the time period selected by the user” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “…and the circuitry is configured to obtain…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 6 recites “wherein the one or more types of business transaction forms include at least one of an invoice, order form, or quotation.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea.
Claim 7 recites the additional elements of “the information processing apparatus of claim 1; and the user terminal configured to display the initial cash budget screen, the recommendation screen and the updated cash budget screen based on information received from the information processing apparatus.” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 10 recites “… past balance information including past income, expense, and cash balance for one or more time periods preceding an operation date, and displays future balance prediction information including predicted income, expense, and cash balance for one or more time periods following the operation date.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional element of “wherein the initial cash budget screen displays…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 11 recites “wherein the future balance prediction information … visually highlights the predicted future cash shortage.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “…displayed on the initial cash budget screen…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 12 recites the additional elements of “wherein the initial cash budget screen includes graphical user interface elements for receiving the user-selected priority condition, the elements including at least a selectable option for service charge rate priority and a selectable option for risk avoidance priority.” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 13 recites “…wherein the condition information further indicates the selected time period used to identify business transaction forms having a payment due date falling within the selected time period” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the initial cash budget screen includes a graphical user interface element for receiving a time period selection from the user, and ….” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 14 recites the additional elements of “wherein the initial cash budget screen includes graphical user interface elements allowing the user to select the one or more types of business transaction forms to be used for financing, the elements including selectable options for at least an invoice, an order form, and a quotation.” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 15 recites “wherein one or more types of business transaction forms include at least one of an invoice, and …, as the specific financing service type corresponding to the invoice, at least one of accounts receivable financing or factoring” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “…the circuitry is configured to obtain…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 16 recites “…as the specific financing service type corresponding to the order form, purchase order (PO) financing” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the circuitry is configured to obtain, ….” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 17 recites “…, a final confirmation indicating user acceptance of the revised future cash balance prediction based on the user selection confirming the one or more financing sources.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the circuitry is further configured to receive from the user terminal after display of the updated cash budget screen…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 18 recites “… to the one or more financing sources confirmed by the user selection, information based on the user selection and the corresponding one or more types of business transaction forms associated with the selected financing sources to initiate application for financing with the financing sources.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the circuitry is further configured to transmit,…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 19 recites “…, in a financing information database storing details of the business transaction forms, a payment status associated with a business transaction form used in the application information transmitted to a confirmed financing source.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the circuitry is further configured to update…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
Claim 20 recites “…receive, from at least one of the one or more confirmed financing sources, status information regarding collection of payment associated with the financed business transaction form from the another user identified as the business partner.” However, this does no more than describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of “wherein the circuitry is further configured to…” does no more than use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and do no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use. Therefore, as it is no more than apply it does not improve the functioning of a computer, or improve other technology or technical field.
The claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. This is because the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field, the claims do not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer system itself, and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, there are no meaningful limitations in the claims that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Prior Art of Record Not Currently Relied Upon
Eiriz (US 2017/0018029 A1) Teaches System for utilizing a money transfer network to facilitate lending.
Bernheimer (US 2013/0339219 A1) Teaches Interactive finance asset management system.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY MARK JAMES whose telephone number is (571)272-5155. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am - 5:00pm EST.
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, Ryan Donlon can be reached at 571-270-3602. 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.
/GREGORY M JAMES/Examiner, Art Unit 3692
/RYAN D DONLON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3692
March 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights