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 . Claim 1 is pending.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 USC § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 (The Statutory Categories): Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? MPEP 2106.03.
Per Step 1, claim 1 is directed to a system (i.e. a machine). Thus, the claim is directed to statutory categories of invention. However, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because it is directed to an abstract idea, a judicial exception, without reciting additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
The analysis proceeds to Step 2A Prong One.
Step 2A Prong One: Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? MPEP 2106.04.
The abstract idea of claim 1 is:
A real estate management system, including residential and commercial properties, for complete inclusion of services, tasks and information transfer between buyers and sellers.
The abstract idea steps italicized above are those which could be performed mentally, including with pen and paper. The steps describe, at a high level, real estate observations, evaluations, judgements, and/or opinions. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), covers performance of the limitation in the mind, including observations, evaluations, judgements, and/or opinions, then it falls within the Mental Processes – Concepts Performed in the Human Mind grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Additionally and alternatively, the claim is directed to real estate transactions and management, which constitutes a process that, under its BRI, covers commercial activity. This is further supported by paragraph [0010] of applicant’s specification as filed. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers commercial interactions, including contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing, sales activities or behaviors, and/or business relations, then it falls within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity – Commercial or Legal Interactions grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? MPEP §2106.04.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements are merely instructions to apply the abstract idea to a computer, as described in MPEP §2106.05(f).
Claim 1 recites the following additional elements: a real estate management software service; a property buying service; a property evaluation software service; a construction/estimation software service; a personal aspect software service; and a closure/follow-up software service.
These elements are merely instructions to apply the abstract idea to a computer, per MPEP §2106.05(f). Applicant has only described generic computing elements in their specification, as seen in paragraph [0109] of applicant’s specification as filed. Further, the combination of these elements is nothing more than a generic computing
system.
Accordingly, these additional elements, alone and in combination, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B (The Inventive Concept): Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? MPEP §2106.05.
Step 2B involves evaluating the additional elements to determine whether they amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
The examination process involves carrying over identification of the additional element(s) in the claim from Step 2A Prong Two and carrying over conclusions from Step 2A Prong Two on the considerations discussed in MPEP §2106.05(f). Similar to the conclusion of Step 2A Prong Two, applicant has only described generic computing elements in their specification, as seen in paragraph [0109] of applicant’s specification as filed. Further, the combination of these elements is nothing more than a generic computing system. Based on MPEP 2106.05(f), this is not significantly more.
Therefore, per Step 2B, the claim is not patent eligible.
Accordingly, claim 1 is rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dejanovic (US 20210224936).
Regarding claim 1, Dejanovic discloses:
A real estate management system, including residential and commercial properties, for complete inclusion of services, tasks and information transfer between buyers and sellers comprising: {Embodiments of the present invention relate to an online, integrated platform, which connects buyers and sellers of real estate assets and related products and services, in such a way as to facilitate their respective tasks in the transaction process, thereby facilitating the transaction as a whole.} (paragraph 0052)
a real estate management software service {Embodiments of the present invention include a web based real estate transaction management platform, represented by a web portal designed as a fully-integrated, step-by-step, highly automated and intuitive process which incorporates a series of submodules that facilitate and optimize multiple aspects of a real estate transaction.} (paragraph 0053)
a property buying service {The buyer computing device 102a is to be used by a buyer interested in buying or renting a real estate property.} (paragraph 0025)
a property evaluation software service {In one embodiment, the platform of the present invention facilitates real estate related transactions by providing to the buyer suggestions for ranked home inspectors, which are stored on the service database. This step is represented in the Evaluation submodule 0250 of FIG. 2.} (paragraph 0114) {Examiner notes feature also shown in paragraph 0172: FIGS. 35 to 38 are screenshots of web pages for prompting entry, in a thirteenth step, information for generating a valuation of the property, including the input of the original purchase price (FIG. 35), and the value of any upgrades made over the course of ownership (FIG. 36).}
a construction/estimation software service {In one embodiment, the portal, in response to a buyer query, can also include a display of the cost to repair and/or an adjustment in value on the dashboard to bring it into scope to meet buyer criteria. Information related to repair costs may be retrieved directly from information maintained in the service database, or may be provided by service providers identified in response to a buyer query.} (paragraph 0115) {Examiner notes feature also shown in paragraph 0085: The platform of the present invention facilitates the real estate transaction by providing estimates for costs associated with making improvements to the home in response to a query from the seller.}
a personal aspect software service; and {Search terms regarding the buyer's preferred criteria, including area of the city, type of property, size of home, price range, affordability, attributes, amenities, and the like, are entered using the buyer dashboard.} (paragraph 0108)
a closure/follow-up software service. {In one embodiment, the platform of the present invention facilitates the real estate transaction by suggesting local, highly ranked service providers for all post-ownership needs including, but not limited to, utilities/phone, cable, home alarm, water service, pool/hot tub companies, furniture/art, landscapers, painting, roofing, renovations, home services, movers, and/or feng shui consultants.} (paragraph 0122)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (additional pertinent prior art found in attached form PTO-892):
US 6321202, which teaches: A system and method for managing real estate transactions is provided. The method includes the steps of receiving and storing data relating to a plurality of contacts including buyers and sellers of real estate, receiving and storing data relating to a plurality of vendors each associated with at least one phase of a real estate transaction, accessing vendor data based upon occurrence of a particular phase of the real estate transaction and communicating data relating to the vendors to a contact upon occurrence of the particular phase of the real estate transaction. The system includes means for conducting each of these steps.
“A Systematic Review of Smart Real Estate Technology: Drivers of, and Barriers to, the Use of Digital Disruptive Technologies and Online Platforms”, which teaches: Real estate needs to improve its adoption of disruptive technologies to move from traditional to smart real estate (SRE). This study reviews the adoption of disruptive technologies in real estate. It covers the applications of nine such technologies, hereby referred to as the Big9. These are: drones, the internet of things (IoT), clouds, software as a service (SaaS), big data, 3D scanning, wearable technologies, virtual and augmented realities (VR and AR), and artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics. The Big9 are examined in terms of their application to real estate and how they can furnish consumers with the kind of information that can avert regrets. The review is based on 213 published articles. The compiled results show the state of each technology’s practice and usage in real estate. This review also surveys dissemination mechanisms, including smartphone technology, websites and social media-based online platforms, as well as the core components of SRE: sustainability, innovative technology and user centredness. It identifies four key real estate stakeholders—consumers, agents and associations, government and regulatory authorities, and complementary industries—and their needs, such as buying or selling property, profits, taxes, business and/or other factors. Interactions between these stakeholders are highlighted, and the specific needs that various technologies address are tabulated in the form of a what, who and how analysis to highlight the impact that the technologies have on key stakeholders. Finally, stakeholder needs as identified in the previous steps are matched theoretically with six extensions of the traditionally accepted technology adoption model (TAM), paving the way for a smoother transition to technology-based benefits for consumers. The findings pertinent to the Big9 technologies in the form of opportunities, potential losses and exploitation levels (OPLEL) analyses highlight the potential utilization of each technology for addressing consumers’ needs and minimizing their regrets. Additionally, the tabulated findings in the form of what, how and who links the Big9 technologies to core consumers’ needs and provides a list of resources needed to ensure proper information dissemination to the stakeholders. Such high-quality information can bridge the gap between real estate consumers and other stakeholders and raise the state of the industry to a level where its consumers have fewer or no regrets. The study, being the first to explore real estate technologies, is limited by the number of research publications on the SRE technologies that has been compensated through incorporation of online reports.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS F MONTALVO whose telephone number is (703)756-5863. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00AM - 5:30PM; First Fridays OOO.
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, Sarah Monfeldt can be reached on 571-270-1833. 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.
/C.F.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3629
/JOHN S. WASAFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629