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
Due to communications filed 9/4/25, the following is a final office action. Claims 1, 2, 5, 11, 12, 15 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application and are rejected as follows. The previous rejection has been modified to reflect claim amendments.
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 toa judicial exception (l.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
With regard to the present claims 1-20, these claim recites a series of steps and, therefore, is a process, and ultimately, is statutory.
In addition, the claim recites a judicial exception. The claims as a whole recite a method of “Mental Processes”. The claimed invention is a method that allows for access, analysis, update and communication of electronic transaction records, which are concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). The mere nominal recitation of a generic computer/computer network does not take the claim out of Mental Processes” grouping. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Furthermore, the claims are not integrated into a practical application. The claim as a whole merely describes how to generally “apply” the concept of accessing, analyzing, updating and communicating transaction information in a computer environment. The claimed computer components are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools to perform an existing transaction records update process. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea.
Finally, the claims do not recite an inventive concept. As noted previously, the claim as a whole merely describes how to generally “apply” the concept of accessing, analyzing, updating and communicating information related to transaction records in a computer environment. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claim is ineligible.
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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AlA) 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9-11, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK (KR 20230122967 A), and further in view of LV (CN 109598519 A), and further in view of CHO (KR 2462212 B1).
As per claim 1, Park discloses:
a non-transitory memory configured to store commands and a table in which a purchase price based on characteristics information of a car is recorded, (In addition, the computer-readable recording medium may include hardware devices specially configured to store and execute program instructions, such as ROM, RAM, and flash memory. The program command may include high-level language codes that can be executed by a computer using an interpreter or the like as well as machine code generated by a compiler...The DB 230 may store at least one command executed through the processor 220. The at least one command obtains, from a user terminal...Obtain brokerage data on used cars purchased and sold by the vendor from the vendor terminal, but the brokerage data includes data on the vehicle identification number, mileage, transaction date, purchase price); and
a controller coupled with the non-transitory memory and configured to execute the commands to, (The processor 220 may include application specific integrated circuits (ASICs)...controllers, and microcontrollers. It may be implemented using at least one of micro-controllers, );
acquire characteristics information of the used car based on the unique information of the used car, (For example, when a user inputs his or her vehicle identification number, the server may call manufacturer data (eg, OEM-data). For example, the server may provide the vehicle identification number to the manufacturer terminal, and obtain exterior parts information, interior parts information, labor information, and painting information of the vehicle corresponding to the vehicle identification number. For example, the exterior part information may include information about the quantity, standard, location, price, and part number of the exterior part. For example, the interior parts information may include information about the quantity, standard, location, price, and part number of the interior parts. The labor information may include information about work hours for each type of damage. The painting information may include painting type and work time information according to the area; For example, the basic information includes the vehicle identification number, main model name, subtype name, OEM, engine, body, wheelbase distance, drive type, transmission, option line, painting method, labor cost, output type, It can include information about language, etc.).
retrieve the purchase price of the used car from the table; transmit the purchase price of the used car to the seller terminal, display the proper price and the purchase price of the used car via the seller terminal, (“When inquiring about the actual cost of the vehicle to be valued above, the user can enter its URL "https://www.cars.com/xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" (only hypothetical, not the real URL) in one of the items for posting the content 302 After inputting it (as shown in Figure 2) and pressing the "Send Calculation" displayed on the user interface 301, the retrieval unit 20 retrieves the valuation parameter corresponding to the vehicle to be valued on the URL and listed in the database 10. That is, according to the "CARS.COM" sales platform webpage, extract the parameters and estimate the total pre-export price of US$26,498 with the production year of 2017 and the car model of "C300"”.
“If the user finds the same type of vehicle to be valued through the "Autotrader" sales platform webpage (as shown in Figure 4), the vehicle brand is also "Mercedes-Benz", the production year is the same as 2017, and the car model is the same as " C300", but the location of the vehicle is "Los Angeles, USA" (the exporting country is also the United States), the local postal code is "XXXXX (show only)", and it also includes "no leather seats", "parking assistance system", "no Equipped with items such as “ventilated seats” and “non-heated seats”, at this time, its website can be reposted to “https://www.autotrader.com/xxxxxxxxxxxxxx” (only hypothetical, not the real website) for posting content. Enter in item 302 (the same as shown in Figure 2), the total price of the vehicle before export is US$26,846 (local car price of US$24,371 plus about 10% service fee of US$2475, this service fee includes land and sea freight of about NT$880 yuan).”; ALSO SEE: “Therefore, according to the aforementioned "Autotrader", the total pre-export price of the vehicle to be valued is NT$751688, and automatically estimated by the automatic vehicle import cost evaluation system 100 of this embodiment, that is, the total price before export is NT$751688, and the tariff is NT$751688. "Taiwan 297314 yuan", the vehicle test fee is "Taiwan dollar 80,000 yuan", and the customs declaration and storage fee is "Taiwan dollar 15,000 yuan", so the actual cost of obtaining the vehicle is "Taiwan dollar 1144002 yuan". At this time, although the original price of the vehicle to be valued by "CARS.COM" is US$24,023, and the original price of the vehicle that seems to be lower than the value of "Autotrader" is US$24,371, compared to the actual cost, " The actual cost of the vehicle to be valued in CARS.COM is "NT$1152503", which is higher than the actual cost of the vehicle to be valued in "Autotrader" "NT$1144002", and the comparison result can be obtained through the above-mentioned comparison module 31 After comparing prices, users can choose to purchase vehicles at a more favorable price on the sales platform webpage of "Autotrader".”).
upon receiving a request to receive estimate prices to be compared with each other from the seller terminal,
and display the characteristics information and the appearance image of the used car via the plurality of buying company terminals, (Obtain brokerage data on used cars purchased and sold by the vendor from the seller's terminal, wherein the brokerage data is based on at least one of vehicle identification number, mileage, transaction date, purchase price, and sales price for the used cars; The basic information of the vehicle subject to value evaluation is the main model name of the vehicle subject to value evaluation corresponding to the vehicle identification number, the name of the sub type, OEM, engine, body, wheelbase distance, drive type, transmission, option line, painting method, labor cost, and output format. , language, etc.);
display the estimate prices via the seller terminal, (The quotation request processing unit 410 may define each element of the moving service agency information as one segment, and build a deep learning model that learns basic quotation data by targeting the quotation cost element and its unit price for each of the defined plurality of segments. have. Such a deep learning model may output an estimated cost section obtained by summing the unit price for each estimated cost element for the input moving service agency information).
Price does not disclose the following limitations, however, LV (CN 201811209392 A), discloses:
and configured to receive data indicative of unique information, an appearance image, and position information of the used car from a seller terminal; receiving the server image acquiring request,
and according to the image acquiring request reads the car photo from the predetermined position; (LV, “Vehicle information may include vehicle information and vehicle information, vehicle information is reflect the vehicle brand and model basic information...condition information is to be vehicle information which can reflect the current appearance and maintenance condition and so on, may be a vehicle owner or worker or special instrument of the vehicle appearance and damage point or maintaining part for photographing or video recording”);
Based on the estimate of the interior parts, determining the appropriateness of at least one of the type, price, quantity, and replacement of the interior parts among the parts used to repair the vehicle subject to value evaluation, (LV: “Abstract: The invention claims a data analysis field, especially claims a vehicle audit method, apparatus, computer apparatus, and a storage medium. the method comprises: receiving the input to be the vehicle of the vehicle information and the vehicle corresponds to be the certificate information of the user, inquiring the credit level corresponding to the document information, and judging whether the credit level satisfies the predetermined condition, when the credit level satisfies the predetermined condition, obtaining the evaluation rule, and based on evaluation rules and vehicle information calculating the value of the vehicle, obtaining the rule, and checking the value according to rule, when passing the auditing value, to be the vehicle of the vehicle information and the certificate information to the server);
acquire a market price of the used car based on the characteristics information of the used car; determine a proper price of the used car by subtracting the maintenance estimate cost from the market price of the used car, (LV (CN 201811209392 A), evaluation rule is a technical personnel by the vehicle status, license plate and the model information of the lot history checking vehicle, new and old degrees, damage condition, purchase year, mileage and other information, to be the value of the vehicle evaluation of rules, e.g., for a vehicle, according to the current market price, subtracting the...maintenance and so on, to obtain the value of the vehicle);
transmit the proper price of the used car to the seller terminal, (Specifically, in the process for the first time, if the auditing terminal judged to be unreasonable value of vehicle according to rule, that is to say value does not pass the audit, the audit terminal transmits the vehicle information to be transmitted to the server. the vehicle information by the server in the secondary , the secondary process, the server can claim to be the vehicle owner to provide more vehicle information, vehicle information value evaluation, to generate new vehicle, server to be the value to be the new value of the vehicle transmitted to the audit terminal; audit terminal continues to be value of the vehicle to check the model according to rule, if the secondary is passed, still considering that the vehicle to be audited by the process , continuously step below);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by LV in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
acquire a maintenance estimate cost based on the appearance image of the used car,
CHO (KR 2462212 B1) “Claims: A method of providing a vehicle repair and sales brokerage service performed by at least one server, the method comprising: obtaining, from a user terminal, a picture of the user's vehicle; obtaining, from a plurality of repair shop terminals, a plurality of repair estimates for the user's vehicle based on the photograph of the user's vehicle”;
transmit the characteristics information and the appearance image of the used car toa plurality of buying company terminals located within a preset distance from a position of the used car; and transmit the estimate prices respectively received from the plurality of buying company terminals to the
seller terminal, (CHO(KR 2462212 B1) obtaining, from a plurality of used car dealer terminals, a plurality of medium and high price quotation information for the user vehicle based on the expected appearance; and obtaining, from the user terminal, selected middle-and-high price quotation information for one of the plurality of middle-and-high-priced quotations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by CHO in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 5, please see the rejection for claim 1.
With respect to implementation in a scrap car environment, Examiner interprets that a change of environment does not change the operation of the system. In other words, the functionality of the system would remain the same regardless of the environment.
As per claim 9, Park does not disclose:
wherein the unique information includes a license plate number and a vehicle identification number of the used car, However, (LV (CN 201811209392 A), discloses: “evaluation rule is a technical personnel by the vehicle status, license plate”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by LV in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 10, Park discloses:
wherein the characteristics information includes at least one of a manufacturer, a vehicle type, a model name, a class (option), a color, a manufacturing year, a displacement, a type of fuel, a transmission type, a cumulative mileage, an acquisition price, a maintenance history, an insurance history, a lease and rental history, a car owner history, or any combination thereof, (“The server may obtain basic information of the vehicle corresponding to the vehicle identification number from the manufacturer (S510). For example, the server obtains basic information of the vehicle to be valued corresponding to the vehicle identification number from a manufacturer terminal of a manufacturer that manufactured the vehicle to be valued, and the basic information is an exterior part of the vehicle to be valued. Information, internal parts information, labor information, and painting information may be included”).
As per claim 11, this claim recites features similar to independent claim 1 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons.
As per claim 15, please see the rejection of claim 5.
As per claim 16, please see the rejection of claim 6.
As per claim 17, please see the rejection of claim 7.
As per claim 18, please see the rejection of claim 8.
As per claim 19, please see the rejection of claim 9.
As per claim 10, please see the rejection of claim 20.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 4, 12, 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK (KR 20230122967 A), and further in view of LV (CN 109598519 A), and further in view of CHO (KR 2462212 B1), and further in view of Cui (TW M613353 U).
As per claim 2, PARK does not specifically disclose:
wherein the non-transitory memory stores therein a table in which an export price based on characteristics information of a car is recorded,
However, Cui discloses: “From the above description, it is not difficult to find that the feature of this creation is that the database 10 has stored the valuation parameters corresponding to the vehicles posted on the sales platform webpage, and the user enters the posted content in the input item 302 displayed on the user interface 301, and then The automatic estimation of the calculation processing unit 30 can be based on the total pre-export price of the exporting country, and the retrieved vehicle at least including tariffs in the importing country, vehicle testing costs, customs declaration storage costs”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by Cui in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 3, please see the combination of claims 1 and 2.
(Mix of claim 1 and claim 2)
As per claim 4, PARK does not specifically disclose: wherein the controller is configured to: determine a price reduction rate of the used car based on a market price history of the used car; and apply the price reduction rate of the used car to the proper export price of the used car to determine a future market price of the used car.
However, Cui discloses: (Therefore, according to the aforementioned "Autotrader", the total pre-export price of the vehicle to be valued is NTS751688, and automatically estimated by the automatic vehicle import cost evaluation system 100 of this embodiment, that is, the total price before export is NTS751688, and the tariff is NTS751688. "Taiwan 297314 yuan", the vehicle test fee is "Taiwan dollar 80,000 yuan", and the customs declaration and storage fee is "Taiwan dollar 15,000 yuan", so the actual cost of obtaining the vehicle is "Taiwan dollar 1144002 yuan". At this time, although the original
price of the vehicle to be valued by "CARS.COM" is USS24,023, and the original price of the vehicle that seems to be lower than the value of "Autotrader" is USS24,371, compared to the actual cost, " The actual cost of the vehicle to be valued in CARS.COM is "NT$1152503", which is higher than the actual cost of the vehicle to be valued in "Autotrader" "NT$S1144002", and the comparison result can be obtained through the above-mentioned comparison module 31 After comparing prices, users can choose to purchase vehicles at a more favorable price on the sales platform webpage of "Autotrader" ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by Cui in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 12, please see the rejection for claim 2.
As per claim 13, Park does not disclose:
wherein, when brokering a used car transaction between a car owner and a used car export company, retrieving, by the controller, the purchase price of the used car includes: retrieving, by the controller, the export price of the used car from the table in which the export price based on the characteristics information of the car is recorded.
However, Cui discloses: (Therefore, according to the aforementioned "Autotrader", the total pre-export price of the vehicle to be valued is NTS751688, and automatically estimated by the automatic vehicle import cost evaluation system 100 of this embodiment, that is, the total price before export is NTS751688, and the tariff is NTS751688. "Taiwan 297314 yuan", the vehicle test fee is "Taiwan dollar 80,000 yuan", and the customs declaration and storage fee is "Taiwan dollar 15,000 yuan", so the actual cost of obtaining the vehicle is "Taiwan dollar 1144002 yuan". At this time, although the original price of the vehicle to be valued by "CARS.COM" is USS24,023, and the original price of the vehicle that
seems to be lower than the value of "Autotrader" is USS24,371, compared to the actual cost, " The actual cost of the vehicle to be valued in CARS.COM is "NT$1152503", which is higher than the actual cost of the vehicle to be valued in "Autotrader" "NT$1144002", and the comparison result can be obtained through the above-mentioned comparison module 31 After comparing prices, users can choose to purchase vehicles at a more favorable price on the sales platform webpage of "Autotrader").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by Cui in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 14, please see the rejection of claim 4.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK (KR 20230122967 A), and further in view of LV (CN 109598519 A), and further in view of CHO (KR 2462212 B1), and further in view of JUNG (KR 102249547 B1).
As per claim 7, PARK et al does not disclose: wherein the controller is configured to acquire the maintenance estimate cost using a deep learning model that has been trained.
However, JUNG discloses: (The unit price calculated by considering the cost factor, which includes the required materials, manpower, vehicle type, and quantity matching the moving service agency information, is acquired as basic estimate data, and each element of the moving service agency information is defined as one segment. , Constructing a quotation calculation deep learning mode! obtained by learning the basic quotation data by targeting the estimated cost element and its unit price for each of a plurality of defined segments, and the moving service agency information obtained from
the operator terminal in the quotation calculation deep learning model. Input to calculate the estimated cost section).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by JUNG in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per claim 8, Park does not disclose: wherein the deep learning model outputs the maintenance estimate cost corresponding to the appearance image of the used car.
However, CHO (KR 2462212 B1) discloses: “Claims: A method of providing a vehicle repair and sales brokerage service performed by at least one server, the method comprising: obtaining, from a user terminal, a picture of the user's vehicle; obtaining, from a plurality of repair shop terminals, a plurality of repair estimates for the user's vehicle based on the photograph of the user's vehicle”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include the above limitations as taught by CHO in the systems of Park, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/4/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the 35 USC 101 rejection, Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the rejection. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Amendments include a “non-transitory memory”, “display the proper price...”, “ display the characteristics information...”, “display the estimate prices...”. However, thee limitations do not overcome the 101. Although the claim is now formatted as a “non-transitory memory”, the underlying steps stored on the medium are the same abstract idea identified previously, and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The “non-transitory memory” does not add technological improvement, does not improve the computer and does not solve a technical problem. In addition, adding a “non-transitory memory”, only avoids “transitory signal”: issues, but does not avoid Alice rejections. Although the present claims include “non-transitory memory”, storing instructions that implement an abstract idea does not integrate the exception into a practical application nor provide an inventive concept.
With reference to the 103 rejection, Applicant argues that prior art used are deficient in teaching the claimed invention. Specifically, with regard to claim 1, Applicant argues that claim 1 specifies the standard purchase price of a vehicle based on characteristic information, whereas Park discloses instructions for acquiring the purchase amounts and sales amounts of used cars previously bought and sold at a dealership. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees. In Park, purchase price is shown as being directly specified along with the car mileage, which is key characteristic information of a used car.
Applicant also argues that LV does not teach or suggest a configuration for determining a proper price of the used car by subtracting the maintenance estimate cost from the market price of the used car as recited in claim 1. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees. LV discloses “for a vehicle, according to the current market price, subtracting the...maintenance and so on, to obtain the value of the vehicle”. LV also discloses “wherein the rule by maintaining the condition of the vehicle in the vehicle history audit record, the...value for the rule is consistent, for example, when to be the value of the vehicle is to be vehicle price”. Therefore, when determining the value with a specific rule, a price is determined.
Applicant further argues that Cho does not teach or suggest the table in which the purchase price is recorded for each characteristic information of a vehicle and a configuration for determining the purchase price of a used car based on the table. However, Examiner has shown the Park has disclosed this table through showing a user interface where prices are calculated. Therefore this limitation is disclosed through the combination of Park and Cho.
Claim 11 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore still rejected for the same reasons.
Dependent claims are rejected for the same reasons as the independent claims that they depend from.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Akiba Robinson whose telephone number is 571-272-6734 and email is Akiba.Robinsonboyce@USPTO.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 6:30am-4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Resha Desai can be reached on 571-270-7792. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 (I N USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (703) 305-3900.
December 2, 2025
/AKIBA K ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628