DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 24 Nov 2025 has been entered.
The following is a non-final office action in response to the amendment and request for continued examination filed 24 Nov 2025.
The applicant's claim for benefit of provisional application US 63/333, 420, filed 21 April 2022 has been received and acknowledged.
Applicant’s amendments to Claims 1, 15 and 20, cancellation of Claim 8 and replacement Abstract have been received and are acknowledged.
Claims 1-7 and 9-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 24 Nov 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner withdraws the objection to the Abstract in view of Applicant’s submission.
With regard to the rejections under 35 USC 101, Applicant argues: (1) Applicant re-argues the instant recited claims “…are not directed to an abstract idea under Step 2A…it's claimed computer process "for generating a user interactive Graphical User Interface (GUI) on a display of a computer system for enabling performance of a loan based upon certain future borrower payment events" …. does not fall within the "Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity" ….” (Applicant’s response, 18-19). (2) Applicant further re- argues that the exemplary independent claim 1 “…relates to a computer algorithmic process… receives data… accessing …”data…” … compiled…. simulate future borrower payment events… of display on a GUI…”. Applicant then again references Ex parte Balestrieri, Appeal No. 2013-007305 (PTAB Oct. 23, 2015) and analogizes that the recited claim limitations “…cannot "be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" and thus cannot be broadly categorized as merely "amount[ing] to nothing more than mere instructions to implement or apply the abstract idea in a generic computing environment (or, merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea.)… these functions are technological, computer cognitive system functions that would not, and cannot "as a practical manner" be performed by a human…"…” (Applicant’s response, 20-21). (3) Applicant further re-asserts the instant recited “novel computer algorithmic process” … “ are integrated in a practical application…” ” (Applicant’s response, 22). (4) Further, Applicant argues that the instant claims are “…directed to an improvement in computer-related technology…” because “…the claimed invention clearly reflects "a particular solution to a problem or a particular way to achieve a desired outcome defined by the claimed invention, as opposed to merely claiming the idea of a solution or outcome" (e.g., 1) accessing, by a computer system, "data from a plurality of network coupled databases"; 2) to be compiled into an "aggregated dataset"; so as to then 3) simulate future borrower payment events "via centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset" for display on a GUI)….” (Applicant’s response, pg. 22-23). (5) Applicant further argues “… this improved computer loan simulation tool that automatically retrieves, and aggregates, from via internet coupled devices, data from a plurality of different databases into a centralized database for computer analysis thereof, recites additional elements that integrates the alleged abstract idea into a practical application…” Applicant additionally references Core Wireless as an example of an invention involving a GUI which was found to be patent eligible. (Applicant’s response, pg. 23-24) (6)Lastly Applicant asserts that the independent claims 1, 15 and 20 and respective dependent claims 2-14, 16-19, and 29 are directed to patentable subject matter. (Applicant’s response pg. 24-25).
Examiner respectfully disagrees as stated in the rejection previously and below. Applicant’s own argument’s state the instant invention is “…for enabling performance of a loan based up certain future borrower payment events…” This is a business problem (i.e. a commercial or legal interaction) and as such are categorized as ‘organizing human activity’ as rejected previously and below. (Applicant’s argument 1) Additionally, Examiner notes that the previous and current rejections do not categorize the recited invention as a mental process; however, it is noted that “collecting information, analyzing it and displaying certain results…” is considered a mental process (See MPEP 2106.04 (a)(2) quoting Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)). Further, using a generic computing elements as a tool to perform an existing process does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. (See MPEP 2106.05 (f) Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015). ) (Applicant’s arguments 2-5). The instant recited invention is not an improvement to GUI technology. Furthermore, a novel abstract idea is still an abstract idea. As such Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. (Applicant’s arguments 2-6). It should be noted that unrelated PTAB decisions though informative are not binding.
With regard to the rejections under 35 USC 103, Applicant argues that the prior art of Ross, Danaher and Kay do not disclose the invention as recited in the newly amended claim limitations.
Examiner respectfully disagrees as cited in the rejection below. Specifically, Examiner notes that Ross is cited in the rejections as the primary reference and that at least Ross, Fig. 9 and 11 clearly disclose the aggregating/collecting of data, the simulation/calculation of loan/credit card balance payoff including the interest paid and suggest/render obvious the principal paid through the disclosure of the remaining balance and interest paid and displaying said scenarios. Further citations can be found in the rejection below. As such, Applicant’s arguments/assertions are not persuasive.
Specification
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 as amended recites : “….responsive to centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, with the computer further displaying graphical indication of a first shaded region indicting a portion of a loan principal a hypothetical payment is applied to and a second shaded region indicating a portion of interest the hypothetical payment is applied…”. The word “indicting’ seems to be a typographical error for ‘indicating.’ Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, (1) it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, (2a) it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea), and if so (2b), it must additionally be determined whether the claim is a patent-eligible application of the exception. If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Examples of abstract ideas include fundamental economic practices; certain methods of organizing human activities; an idea itself; and mathematical relationships/formulas. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., 573 U.S. ____ (2014).
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, the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
(1) In the instant case, the claims are directed towards a methods for simulating future performance of a loan structure based on one or more payment events by using a graphical user interface (Specification 1) . In the instant case, Claims 1-7, 9-14 , 15-19 and 20 are directed to a process.
(2a) Prong 1: simulating future performance of a loans based on payment events is categorized in/akin to the abstract idea subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity [organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations)]. As such, the claims include an abstract idea.
The specific limitations of the invention are (a) identified to encompass the abstract idea include:
1. A … process for generating a user interactive …. for enabling performance of a loan based upon certain future borrower payment events, comprising:
accessing, by the…, data from….relating to a loan assigned to a borrower; and
aggregating, data accessed by the plurality of network coupled databases, into an aggregated dataset;
generating, by the …. via user interaction with… one or more simulations regarding performance of the loan based upon one or more future borrower payment events enabled by the user interaction with … and via centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset; and
…, by the …, results of the one or more simulations on the….responsive to centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, with the computer further displaying graphical indication of a first shaded region indicting a portion of a loan principal a hypothetical payment is applied to and a second shaded region indicating a portion of interest the hypothetical payment is applied to wherein further simultaneously displayed on the GUI is: 1) the borrower's balance at maturity when the borrower submits a payment on the current date to bring the loan account current; 2) the amount the borrower is required to submit on the current date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity with all contractual payments being timely submitted until…maturity (monthly payment); and 3) the amount the borrower is required to timely submit each month (monthly payment) to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submitting a full amount past due on the current date (payment today).
15. A… process for generating a user interactive …. for simulating performance of a loan based upon certain future borrower payment events, comprising:
accessing, …, data from … relating to a loan assigned to a borrower;
aggregating, data accessed by the plurality of network coupled databases, into an aggregated dataset;
determining,…, a current status of the loan; and
generating, …, via user interaction …. at least the following simulations regarding performance of the loan based upon one or more future borrower payment events contingent upon information inputted to the computer system:
indicating the borrower's balance at maturity utilizing the criteria:
borrower submits a payment on a current date to bring the loan account current (payment today) and borrower submits all contractual payments on a scheduled due date each remaining month until maturity (monthly payment);
indicating an amount the borrower would need to submit on the current date to have a zero $0 balance at maturity contingent upon all contractual payments are submitted on the scheduled due date for each remaining month until maturity; and
indicating an amount the borrower would need to submit each month on a scheduled due date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submits a full amount past due on the current date; and
…. …, results of the simulations regarding performance of the loan …. responsive to centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, with the computer further displaying graphical indication of a first shaded region indicting a portion of a loan principal a hypothetical payment is applied to and a second shaded region indicating a portion of interest the hypothetical payment is applied to wherein further simultaneously displayed on the GUI is: 1) the borrower's balance at maturity when the borrower submits a payment on the current date to bring the loan account current; 2) the amount the borrower is required to submit on the current date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity with all contractual payments being timely submitted until…maturity (monthly payment); and 3) the amount the borrower is required to timely submit each month (monthly payment) to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submitting a full amount past due on the current date (payment today).
20. A … for generating a user interactive … on a…for enabling performance of a loan based upon certain future borrower payment events, comprising:
accessing,…, data … relating to a loan assigned to a borrower; and
aggregating, data accessed by the plurality of network coupled databases, into an aggregated dataset;
generating, …, via user interaction …, one or more simulations regarding performance of the loan based upon one or more future borrower payment events enabled by the user interaction … and via centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, wherein… includes a graph having a user interactive … associated with the borrower's payment whereby movement of the … by a user alters the one or more simulations in accordance with slider movement;
…, …, results of the one or more simulations …responsive to centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, with the computer further displaying graphical indication of a first shaded region indicting a portion of a loan principal a hypothetical payment is applied to and a second shaded region indicating a portion of interest the hypothetical payment is applied to wherein further simultaneously displayed on the GUI is: 1) the borrower's balance at maturity when the borrower submits a payment on the current date to bring the loan account current; 2) the amount the borrower is required to submit on the current date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity with all contractual payments being timely submitted until…maturity (monthly payment); and 3) the amount the borrower is required to timely submit each month (monthly payment) to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submitting a full amount past due on the current date (payment today); and
enabling, …, modification of the results displayed … by providing one or more interactive tools … configured to be manipulated by the user to alter one or more parameters regarding performance of the loan.
As stated above, this abstract idea falls into the (b) subject matter grouping of: methods of organizing human activity .
Prong 2: When considered individually and in combination, the instant claims are do not integrate the exception into a practical application because the steps of accessing…aggregating… generating…{indicating… indicating…indicating….}…enabling.do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that that imposes a meaningful limitation on the judicial exception (i.e. the abstract idea).
The instant recited claims including additional elements (i.e…. {indicating… indicating…indicating….}…displaying…) do not improve the functioning of the computer or improve another technology or technical field nor do they recite meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. The limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer a as tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions e (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g))
(2b) In the instant case, Claims 1-7, 9-14 , 15-19 and 20 are directed to a process.
Additionally, the claims (independent and dependent) do not include additional elements that individually or in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception of abstract idea (i.e. provide an inventive concept). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element(s) of: (computer, graphical user interface, display, network, database… slider) merely uses a computer a as tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)) (Specification pg. 3 graphical user interface, slider, computer, 5- 4, well-known computing systems, environments…program modules…. computing device…)
The dependent claims have also been examined and do not correct the deficiencies of the independent claims.
It is noted that claim (2-7, 9-14 and 16-19) introduces the additional elements of: …enabling medication of results … (claims 2 and 16); …determining current status …(Claim 3); further defining the simulations [ …further includes generating…(Claim 4)… displaying… (Claims 5, 6, 7).simulating…(Claim 9) ] additional elements … wherein ..interactive tools… interactive slider…(Claim 10) wherein the GUI is provided…(Claims 11 and 18) …wherein the GUI includes a graph (Claim 14 and 17); further defining the actions of the borrower/customer service agent… (Claims 12 and 19) further defining the loan type (Claim 13). These elements are not a practical application of the judicial exception because the limitations merely recite: “apply it” (or an equivalent) or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer a as tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)) Further these limitations taken alone or in combination with the abstract do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea alone because, ).these elements amount to mere use of a computer a as tool to perform an abstract idea or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception or merely uses generic computing elements to perform well known, routine, and conventional functions. (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)) (Specification pg. 3 graphical user interface, slider, computer, 5- 4, well-known computing systems, environments…program modules…. computing device…)
Therefore, claims 1-7 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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 1-7, 9-10, 13-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20030149659, Danaher et al. hereinafter referred to as Danaher further in view of US 20100268629 A1, Ross et al. hereinafter referred to as Ross.
Claims 1, 15 and 20
Ross discloses 1. A computer process for generating a user interactive Graphical User Interface (GUI) on a display of a computer system for enabling performance of … based upon certain future borrower payment events, comprising:
accessing, by the computer system, a plurality of network coupled databases relating to …assigned to a borrower; and ( See at least Ross, Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
aggregating, data accessed by the plurality of network coupled databases, into an aggregated dataset; ( See at least Ross, Fig,. 11 [144-145] Fig. 11… system may receive, as part of its data collection information from internal/external sources…data collected may be mined using algorithms and/or reality mining…)
generating, by the computer system, via user interaction with the GUI, one or more simulations regarding performance … based upon one or more future borrower payment events enabled by the user interaction with the GUI; and via centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance Fig. 11, Data collection, impact of purchase on your goals.. 606, 608, 610, 612… [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
displaying, by the computer system, results of the one or more simulations on the GUI responsive to centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, with the computer further displaying graphical indication of a first shaded region indicting a portion of a … a hypothetical payment is applied to and a second shaded region indicating a portion of interest the hypothetical payment is applied to wherein further simultaneously displayed on the GUI is: 1) the borrower's balance at maturity when the borrower submits a payment on the current date to bring the … account current; 2) the amount the borrower is required to submit on the current date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity with all contractual payments being timely submitted until…maturity (monthly payment); and 3) the amount the borrower is required to timely submit each month (monthly payment) to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submitting a full amount past due on the current date (payment today). and (See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…including interest paid, new interest rate, new monthly payments, see two types of shading…. Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose; however, Ross does suggest:
…. a portion of a loan principal… ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, including interest paid, new interest rate, new monthly payments, see two types of shading)
Based on the disclosure of the interest paid and the balance remaining, the indication of the loan/credit card principal is obvious as the balance is based on the interest and principal. (See also MPEP 2144.05 II Routine Optimization)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
…a loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
… one or more simulations regarding performance of the loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 [008] ‘what it’ scenarios [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has supported in KSR International Co. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550US___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), that merely applying a known technique to a known method, yield predictable results, render the claimed invention obvious over such combination. In the instant case, Ross discloses a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator including graphs and slider bars. Danaher is another method and system of loan rate and loan rate analysis including ‘what if’ calculators which allow users to assess the impact of calculators. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize that this combination would lead to a predictable result (i.e. a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator/ “what if” calculator for debts including credit cards and other types loans which have graphs and slider bars as features). As such the claimed invention is obvious over Ross/Danaher.
Ross discloses 15. A computer process for generating a user interactive Graphical User Interface (GUI) on a display of a computer system for simulating performance of a … based upon certain future borrower payment events, comprising:
accessing, by the computer system, data from a plurality of network coupled databases relating to … assigned to a borrower;. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
aggregating, data accessed by the plurality of network coupled databases, into an aggregated dataset; ( See at least Ross, Fig,. 11 [144-145] Fig. 11… system may receive, as part of its data collection information from internal/external sources…data collected may be mined using algorithms and/or reality mining…)
determining, by the computer system, a current status of the …; and ( See at least Ross, Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
generating, by the computer system, via user interaction with the GUI, at least the following simulations regarding performance … based upon one or more future borrower payment events contingent upon information inputted to the computer system:
indicating the borrower's balance at maturity utilizing the criteria:
borrower submits a payment on a current date to bring the … account current (payment today) and borrower submits all contractual payments on a scheduled due date each remaining month until maturity (monthly payment); ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
indicating an amount the borrower would need to submit on the current date to have a zero $0 balance at maturity contingent upon all contractual payments are submitted on the scheduled due date for each remaining month until maturity; and ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…. Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
indicating an amount the borrower would need to submit each month on a scheduled due date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submits a full amount past due on the current date; and ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
displaying, by the computer system, results of the simulations regarding performance of … on the GUI responsive to centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, with the computer further displaying graphical indication of a first shaded region indicating a portion of a loan …. a hypothetical payment is applied to and a second shaded region indicating a portion of interest the hypothetical payment is applied to wherein further simultaneously displayed on the GUI is: 1) the borrower's balance at maturity when the borrower submits a payment on the current date to bring the … account current; 2) the amount the borrower is required to submit on the current date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity with all contractual payments being timely submitted until…maturity (monthly payment); and 3) the amount the borrower is required to timely submit each month (monthly payment) to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submitting a full amount past due on the current date (payment today). and (See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…including interest paid, new interest rate, new monthly payments, see two types of shading…. Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose; however, Ross does suggest:
…. a portion of a loan principal… ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, including interest paid, new interest rate, new monthly payments, see two types of shading)
Based on the disclosure of the interest paid and the balance remaining, the indication of the loan/credit card principal is obvious as the balance is based on the interest and principal. (See also MPEP 2144.05 II Routine Optimization)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
…a loan… ((See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
… one or more simulations regarding performance of the loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 [008] ‘what it’ scenarios [153] ‘what if’ scenarios, )
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has supported in KSR International Co. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550US___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), that merely applying a known technique to a known method, yield predictable results, render the claimed invention obvious over such combination. In the instant case, Ross discloses a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator including graphs and slider bars. Danaher is another method and system of loan rate and loan rate analysis including ‘what if’ calculators which allow users to assess the impact of calculators. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize that this combination would lead to a predictable result (i.e. a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator/ “what if” calculator for debts including credit cards and other types loans which have graphs and slider bars as features). As such the claimed invention is obvious over Ross/Danaher.
Ross discloses 20. A computer process for generating a user interactive Graphical User Interface (GUI) on a display of a computer system for enabling performance of a …based upon certain future borrower payment events, comprising:
accessing, by the computer system, data from a plurality of network coupled databases relating to … assigned to a borrower; … ( See at least Ross, Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
aggregating, data accessed by the plurality of network coupled databases, into an aggregated dataset; ( See at least Ross, Fig,. 11 [144-145] Fig. 11… system may receive, as part of its data collection information from internal/external sources…data collected may be mined using algorithms and/or reality mining…)
generating, by the computer system, via user interaction with the GUI, one or more simulations regarding performance …based upon one or more future borrower payment events enabled by the user interaction with the GUI, and via centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset wherein the GUI includes a graph having a user interactive slider associated with the borrower's payment whereby movement of the slider by a user alters the one or more simulations in accordance with slider movement; ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments slider, new interest rate slider [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
displaying, by the computer system, results of the one or more simulations on the GUI responsive to centralized simulation analysis of the aggregated dataset, with the computer further displaying graphical indication of a first shaded region indicting a portion of a loan principal a hypothetical payment is applied to and a second shaded region indicating a portion of interest the hypothetical payment is applied to wherein further simultaneously displayed on the GUI is: 1) the borrower's balance at maturity when the borrower submits a payment on the current date to bring the … account current; 2) the amount the borrower is required to submit on the current date to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity with all contractual payments being timely submitted until…maturity (monthly payment); and 3) the amount the borrower is required to timely submit each month (monthly payment) to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submitting a full amount past due on the current date (payment today). and (See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…including interest paid, new interest rate, new monthly payments, see two types of shading…. Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
enabling, by the computer system, modification of the results displayed on the GUI by providing one or more interactive tools on the GUI configured to be manipulated by the user to alter one or more parameters regarding performance of …. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments slider , new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose; however, Ross does suggest:
…. a portion of a loan principal… ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, including interest paid, new interest rate, new monthly payments, see two types of shading)
Based on the disclosure of the interest paid and the balance remaining, the indication of the loan/credit card principal is obvious as the balance is based on the interest and principal. (See also MPEP 2144.05 II Routine Optimization)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
…a loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
… one or more simulations regarding performance of the loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 [008] ‘what it’ scenarios [153] ‘what if’ scenarios, )
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has supported in KSR International Co. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550US___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), that merely applying a known technique to a known method, yield predictable results, render the claimed invention obvious over such combination. In the instant case, Ross discloses a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator including graphs and slider bars. Danaher is another method and system of loan rate and loan rate analysis including ‘what if’ calculators which allow users to assess the impact of calculators. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize that this combination would lead to a predictable result (i.e. a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator/ “what if” calculator for debts including credit cards and other types loans which have graphs and slider bars as features). As such the claimed invention is obvious over Ross/Danaher.
Claims 2 and 16
Ross and Danaher disclose the invention as claimed above in Claims 1 and 15.
Ross further discloses:
further including enabling modification of the results displayed on the GUI by providing one or more interactive tools on the GUI configured to be manipulated by the user to alter one or more parameters regarding performance of the …. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments slider , new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
… loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
Claim 3
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 2.
Ross further discloses:
further including determining, by the computer system, the current status of the … so as to be displayed on the GUI, wherein the determined current status of the …includes a snapshot of the … displayed on the GUI, and wherein the snapshot includes one or more of the following … items:
current account status; current principal balance; unpaid accrued interest; unpaid fees; days past due; amount past due; monthly payment amount; interest rate; current maturity date;payments made; number of repossessions; charge off date; next due date; number of times … was paid late (30, 60 and 90 days) and current per diem. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments slider , new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
… loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
Claim 4
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
Ross further discloses:
wherein each of the one or more simulations regarding performance of the …contingent upon one or more future borrower payment events further includes generating default payment simulations such that displayed on the GUI is ….information regarding: payment today, monthly payment, total of payments, and balance at maturity. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
… loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
Claim 5
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 4.
Ross further discloses:
wherein the simulation includes displaying the borrower's balance at maturity utilizing the criteria: borrower submits a payment on a current date to bring the … account current (payment today); and borrower submits all contractual payments on a scheduled due date for each remaining month until maturity (monthly payment). ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
… loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
Claim 6
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 5.
Ross further discloses:
wherein the simulation includes displaying an amount the borrower is required to submit on the current date (payment today) to have a zero ($0) balance at … maturity contingent upon all contractual payments being timely submitted until …maturity (monthly payment). ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance Fig. 11, Data collection, [29] expenditure tracking…[78] initial setup ….[141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
… loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
Claim 7
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 6.
Ross further discloses:
wherein the simulation includes displaying on the GUI an amount the borrower is required to timely submit each month(monthly payment) to have a zero ($0) balance at maturity contingent upon the borrower submitting a full amount past due on a current date (payment today). ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Claim 9
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 5.
Ross further discloses:
wherein the one or more simulations includes simulating, via user manipulation of the interactive tools provided on the GUI, different scenarios for future borrower payment behavior to determine, and display on the GUI, the impact upon the …balance at maturity based on behavior appropriate to the payment allocation. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
… loan… (See at least Danaher Fig. 2-4 , 8 008] ‘what it’ scenarios [18-22] database [153] ‘what if’ scenarios)
Claims 10 and 17
Ross and Danaher disclose the invention as claimed above in Claims 2 and 16.
Ross further discloses:
wherein the one or more interactive tools includes an interactive slider for the borrower's payment which movement thereof by a user of the UI will alter the current simulation in accordance with slider movement. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments, new interest rate …payoff…. [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Claims 13
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Danaher teaches:
wherein the loan consists of a: personal loan; auto loan; student loan; home equity loan; and debt consolidation loan. (See at least Danaher [22] variety of loan types… home loan, auto loan, home equity loan; [137-138] refinancing with cash/debt consolidation…wherein ‘a’ is interpreted as ‘one of’)
Claim 14
Ross and Danaher discloses the invention as claimed above in Claim 1.
Ross further discloses:
wherein the GUI includes a graph having a user interactive slider for the borrower's payment which movement thereof by a user of the GUI alters the current simulation in accordance with slider movement. ( See at least Ross, Fig. 9 starting balance, new monthly payments slider, new interest rate slider [141-143] Fig. 9 … credit card balance)
Claims 11-12 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross in view of Danaher further in view of US 20110249081 A1, Kay et al. hereinafter referred to as Kay .
Claims 11 and 18
Ross and Danaher disclose the invention as claimed above in Claims 10 and 17.
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Kay teaches:
wherein the GUI is provided on a display accessible by each of the borrower and a customer service agent associated with the loan. (See at least Kay , Fig. 1-3, Claim 1, Claim 9)
Furthermore, the Supreme Court has supported in KSR International Co. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550US___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), that merely applying a known technique to a known method, yield predictable results, render the claimed invention obvious over such combination. In the instant case, Ross discloses a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator including graphs and slider bars. Danaher is another method and system of loan rate and loan rate analysis including ‘what if’ calculators which allow users to assess the impact of calculators. Kay discloses a customer support system with a two way communication system between a customer service representative and a customer/user. One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize that this combination would lead to a predictable result (i.e. a method and system of budgeting including a debt payoff calculator/ “what if” calculator for debts including credit cards and other types loans which have graphs and slider bars as features and including a two way communication system between a customer service representative and a customer/us). As such the claimed invention is obvious over Ross/Danaher/ Kay.
Claims 12 and 19
Ross, Danaher and Kay disclose the invention as claimed above in Claims 11 and 18.
Ross does not directly disclose the following; however, Kay teaches:
wherein each of the borrower and the customer service agent inputs data, via the GUI provided on their respective display, to initiate a simulation regarding performance of the loan. (See at least Kay , Fig. 1-3, Claim 1, Claim 9)
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2005/0246267 A1(Mortgage Financial System )
US 2005/0273430 A1 (SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SCORING BANK CUSTOMERS DIRECT DEPOSIT ACCOUNT TRANSACTION ACTIVITY TO
MATCH FINANCIAL BEHAVIOR TO SPECIFIC ACQUSITION, PERFORMANCE AND RISK EVENTS DEFINED BY THE BANK USING A DECISION TREE AND STOCHASTIC PROCESS)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHA PUTTAIA H whose telephone number is (571)270-1352. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday- Friday 8:00am - 5:00 pm EST.
13. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Abhishek Vyas, can be reached on (571) 270-1836. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
14. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ASHA PUTTAIA H/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3691