DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to RCE/Amendment filed 12/16/2025.
Claims 1, 3-14 and 16-23 are pending in this application. In the Amendment, claim 1 is amended and claim 15 is cancelled.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims amended 12/16/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 3-14, 16-17 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eftekhari et al. (“Eftekhari”, US 2012/0109792) in view of Ciaramitaro (US 11,176,619) and further in view of Mukherjee (US 6,314,415).
As per claim 1, Eftekhari teaches a method, including:
electronically initiating a process to collect data via a graphical user interface (GUI) to facilitate automated preparation of an electronic registration before initiating a process to remit resources from a first entity to one or more recipient entities based on relationship instances between the first entity and a plurality of secondary entities (Eftekhari, para.29-30, 51-52, 56, tax server has relationships with financial institutions containing related tax payer information);
electronically obtaining a pre-existing entity identifier that had been previously used by an electronic system of at least one authority entity to identify the first entity (Eftekhari, para.49, 51, EIN/identifiers associated with first entity/user and financial institutions);
electronically establishing the pre-existing entity identifier to be associated with the first entity (Eftekhari, para.49, 51, EIN/identifiers associated with first entity/user and financial institutions);
using the entity identifier, performing automated actions to electronically collect one or more support content from the Internet regarding the first entity to facilitate automated preparation of the electronic registration document (Eftekhari, para.29-30, 49, 51-54, 56-57, content from financial institutions downloaded based on EIN/identifiers associated with user);
electronically identifying data from the one or more support content relevant to the electronic registration (Eftekhari, para.29-30, 49, 51-54, 58-59, 67, 91, content from financial institutions downloaded based on EIN/identifiers associated with user and relevancy);
electronically extracting the identified data from the one or more support content in response to the electronically identifying the data (Eftekhari, para.29-30, 49, 51-54, data retrieved and extracted to populate current tax return);
electronically verifying the extracted data (Eftekhari, para.27, 61, 80, 84-86, 97, clarification/validation for accuracy);
electronically determining, based on the extracted data, whether to electronically present a query via the GUI for supplemental data regarding the first entity to facilitate automated preparation of the electronic registration (Eftekhari, para.32, 34, 47, 61, 84, interview questions based on extracted data in partially completed tax return);
automatically modifying the GUI in response to the determination whether to electronically present a query via the GUI for the supplemental data (Eftekhari, para.36-38, 68, 75, 93, personalized interview questions);
electronically presenting the query via the GUI for the supplemental data (Eftekhari, para.32, 34, 47, 61, 84, present interview questions to collect add’l data for completing tax return);
electronically receiving the supplemental data via the GUI in response to electronically presenting the query via the GUI for the supplemental data (Eftekhari, para.76, 78, answers to questions received and populated to form);
electronically verifying the supplemental data (Eftekhari, para.27, 61, 80, 84-86, 97, clarification/validation for accuracy); and
electronically generating the electronic registration based on the extracted data (Eftekhari, para.60, 63, 73, 78, 80, generation of tax return based on retrieved data).
However, Eftekhari does not explicitly teach to electronically collect one or more support content from the Internet regarding the first entity without relying on user-provided lists of Internet sources. Ciaramitaro teaches a method of preparing tax forms by electronically collecting one or more support content from the Internet regarding the entity without relying on user-provided lists of Internet sources (Ciaramitaro, col.8, lines 43-58, import data from third party data sources without user provided account id; col.10, lines 3-19, suggested prompts). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Ciaramitaro’s teaching with Eftekhari’s method in order to import content from alternative sources.
Furthermore, the method of Eftekhari and Ciaramitaro does not teach electronically receiving digital registration rules via the GUI; and automatically modifying the GUI according to the received digital registration rules to collect additional data via the GUI, in which the performing automated actions to electronically collect one or more support content from the Internet regarding the first entity to facilitate automated preparation of the electronic registration document is also based on the additional data. Mukherjee teaches a method of dynamically generating a GUI by receiving digital registration rules via the GUI and automatically modifying the GUI according to the received digital registration rules to collect additional data via the GUI, in which the performing automated actions to electronically collect one or more support content from the Internet regarding the first entity to facilitate automated preparation of the electronic registration document is also based on the additional data (Mukherjee, col.8, lines 53-65; col.9, line 54-col.10, line 11; col.13, lines 10-11; col.16, line 61-col.17, line 17, rules change appearance of display; selections fire rules that enable add’l prompts for add’l data). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Mukherjee’s teaching with the method of Eftekhari and Ciaramitaro in order to reduce irrelevant and redundant information (Mukherjee, col.19, lines 8-24).
As per claim 3, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the electronically generating the electronic registration is based on the extracted data and the supplemental data (Eftekhari, para.74, 78, 80, generation of tax return based on retrieved data).
As per claim 4, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the supplemental data includes one or more of: registration information regarding the first entity; information regarding the first entity stored by the at least one authority entity; information regarding the first entity available from public records identified using the entity identifier; information regarding the relationship instances between the first entity and a plurality of secondary entities; identification information regarding the first entity; location of the first entity; address of the first entity; name of individual associated with the first entity; products provided by the first entity; and services provided by the first entity (Eftekhari, para.85-86, information regarding the relationship between the first and secondary entities).
As per claim 5, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the at least one authority entity is the one or more recipient entities (Eftekhari, para.27, tax authorities receive tax returns)
As per claim 6, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the one or more support content includes one or more electronic documents (Eftekhari, para.21, 29, 42, 52, user supplied/downloaded documents)
As per claim 7, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 6 in which:
the electronically identifying data from the one or more support content relevant to the electronic registration includes electronically reading the one or more electronic documents to identify data relevant to the electronic registration in the one or more electronic documents (Eftekhari, para.29, 42, 54, 59, 83, user supplied/downloaded document are scanned for data); and
the electronically extracting the identified data from the one or more support content in response to the electronically identifying the data includes electronically extracting the identified data from the one or more electronic documents (Eftekhari, para.21, 29-30, 54, 83, 86, data retrieved and extracted to populate current tax return).
As per claim 8, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1, in which the operations further include:
based on the entity identifier, electronically determining whether to electronically present a query via the GUI for additional data to electronically collect information regarding the first entity to facilitate automated preparation of the electronic registration (Eftekhari, para.32, 34, 36-38, 47, 61, 68, 75, 84, 93, interview questions personalized to entity identifier);
automatically modifying the GUI in response to the determination whether to electronically present the query via the GUI for the additional data (Eftekhari, para.36-38, 68, 75, 93, personalized interview questions);
electronically presenting the query via the GUI for the for additional data (Eftekhari, para.32, 34, 47, 61, 84, present interview questions to collect add’l data for completing tax return); and
receiving the additional data in response to the query, in which the electronically generating the electronic registration is also based on the additional data (Eftekhari, para.32-38, 74, 76, 78, 80, answers to questions received and populated to tax return based on retrieved data).
As per claim 9, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 8 in which the additional data includes information to facilitate locating the additional data (Eftekhari, para.32-38, 74, 76, 78, 80, questions personalized to user).
As per claim 10, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 8 in which the determining whether to present the query for additional data is based on a determination whether the additional data may be obtained using the entity identifier alone (Eftekhari, para.32, 34, 47, 61, 84, interview questions based on and personalized to specific entity).
As per claim 11, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the performing the automated actions to electronically collect one or more support content includes:
using the entity identifier to identify which recipient entity of the one or more recipient entities and which digital rules associated with the identified recipient entity to use to determine locations of relevant support content for generating the electronic registration (Eftekhari, para.36-38, 49, 51, 57, identifier from user profile associated with content from institutions).
As per claim 12, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 11 in which the locations of relevant support content include one or more of: one or more web sites; one or more data servers; one or more data streams (Eftekhari, p.53, 63, web sites).
As per claim 13, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the electronically identifying data from the one or more support content relevant to the electronic registration includes: using the entity identifier to identify which recipient entity of the one or more recipient entities and which digital rules associated with the identified recipient entity to use to determine which data is relevant from the one or more support content for generating the electronic registration (Eftekhari, para.30, 36-38, 49, 51, 57, 82, identifier from user profile associated with content from institutions to identify required content).
As per claim 14, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the electronically generating the electronic registration based on the extracted data includes: using the entity identifier to identify which recipient entity of the one or more recipient entities and which digital rules associated with the identified recipient entity to use to generate the electronic registration (Eftekhari, para.25, 60, 78, tax server determines liability of entity).
As per claim 16, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the electronically obtaining a pre-existing entity identifier includes: receiving an electronic document submitted via the GUI; extracting the entity identifier from the electronic document submitted via the GUI (Eftekhari, para. 29-30, 51-52, 56, 82, identifier from user profile).
As per claim 17, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the electronically obtaining a pre-existing entity identifier includes: presenting a prompt via the GUI for the entity identifier and a field into which the entity identifier is able to be entered; and receiving the entity identifier via the GUI from the field into which the entity identifier was entered (Eftekhari, para.21, 29-30, 43, 51-52, 56, 82, identifier can be manually entered).
As per claim 19, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the generating the electronic registration includes: using a form generator to collate at least some the extracted data to electronically generate an electronic registration form according to digital rules which are based on requirements of a selected one of the one or more recipient entities to which the registration form will be sent (Eftekhari, para.30, 36-38, 49, 51, 57, 82, identifier from user profile associated with content from institutions to identify required content).
As per claim 20, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the automated actions include using a web crawler to go to public web sites to collect the one or more support content (Eftekhari, p.53, 63, web scraping).
As per claim 21, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 in which the generating the electronic registration is also based on existing data regarding the first entity already stored within a system that generates the electronic registration resulting from providing past electronic services calculating or remitting resources from the first entity to one or more recipient entities (Eftekhari, para.29, 42, 56, 63, existing data from previously filed returns).
Claims 18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eftekhari et al. (“Eftekhari”, US 2012/0109792), Ciaramitaro (US 11,176,619) and Mukherjee (US 6,314,415) in view of Regan (US 2014/0180883).
As per claim 18, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1, however does not teach generating a customer identifier based on the pre-existing entity identifier to identify the first entity within a system that generates the electronic registration. Regan teaches a method of preparing tax forms wherein generating a customer identifier based on the pre-existing entity identifier to identify the first entity within a system that generates the electronic registration (Regan, para.281, 283, 353, Fig.18A, customer number 1802 associated with entity). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Regan’s teaching with the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee in order to combine all documents related to one individual.
As per claim 22, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee teaches the method of claim 1 however does not teach presenting, via the GUI, a status of the electronic registration for each different recipient for which electronic registration is being performed for the first entity. Regan teaches a method of preparing tax forms wherein presenting, via the GUI, a status of the electronic registration for each different recipient for which electronic registration is being performed for the first entity (Regan, para.588, 629; Fig.28, processing status of registrations). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Regan’s teaching with the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro and Mukherjee in order to verify completion of registrations.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eftekhari et al. (“Eftekhari”, US 2012/0109792), Ciaramitaro (US 11,176,619), Mukherjee (US 6,314,415) and Regan (US 2014/0180883) in view of Miller (US 2012/0036053).
As per claim 23, the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro, Mukherjee and Regan teaches the method of claim 22 however does not teach in which the status is regarding one or more of: electronic signatures associated with the first entity needed from the first entity to complete registration and translations needed from the first entity to complete registration. Miller teaches a method of reporting tax information wherein the status of registration displays errors regarding the electronic signatures associated with the first entity needed from the first entity to complete registration (Miller, para.91, signature not provided). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Miller’s teaching with the method of Eftekhari, Ciaramitaro, Mukherjee and Regan in order to determine how to complete registrations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (US 11,087,411) teaches a method of modifying a GUI using tax rules.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAJEDA MUHEBBULLAH whose telephone number is (571)272-4065. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Tue/Thur-Fri 10am-8pm.
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, William L Bashore can be reached at 571-272-4088. 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.
/S.M./
Sajeda Muhebbullah Examiner, Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174