DETAILED ACTION
This is a Final Office Action in response to the Amendment filed 11/06/2025.
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
Claims 1-26 are currently pending in the application and have been examined.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 11/06/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant submits that the claims recite patent-eligible subject matter. Examiner notes that according to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (PEG) and under step 2A of the analysis of claims per the Alice framework, if a claim limitation covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Applicant submits that the claims provide improved location-based functionality and for this reason, are directed to statutory subject matter. Further Applicant submits that the pending claims recite using particular types of inter-device electronic communications that improve the functioning of the computing devices. Examiner respectfully disagrees, noting that the limitations of transmission of data between electronic devices are steps of collecting and transmitting information and the additional elements recited in the claims are not improving any prior art systems and are just performing a generic computer function of sending and receiving data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patentable subject matter. The claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
With respect to claims 1-26, the independent claims (claims 1, 4, 18 and 23) are directed, in part, to a method, a non-transitory computer readable medium and a system for automated property access. Step 1 – First pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance, claims 1-17 are directed to a method comprising a series of steps which falls under the statutory category of a process, claims 18-22 are directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium, which falls under the statutory category of an article of manufacture and claims 23-26 are directed to a system which falls under the statutory category of a machine. However, these claim elements are considered to be abstract ideas because they are directed to a method of organizing human activity which includes managing relationships or interactions between people.
As per Step 2A - Prong 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, the claims are directed, in part, to determining… at least one indicated physical property to which a first user requests access for one or more first availability times together with a second user who is authorized to access the at least one indicated physical property and is not yet identified, including: gathering… information about one or more physical properties and about first attributes of the first user and about a first location…; determining…based at least in part on the gathered information, multiple physical properties for the first user from a plurality of physical properties that are under control of one or more third users who are unaffiliated with the first user and with the second user; retrieving… via one or more first electronic communications… current availability times for the multiple physical properties; and performing second interactions with the first user… including presenting information about the multiple physical properties that includes the retrieved current availability times, and receiving selections by the first user of the at least one indicated physical property from the multiple physical properties and of the one or more first availability times from the current availability times; determining… from multiple alternative candidate users authorized to access the at least one indicated physical property, one of the multiple alternative candidate users to access the at least one indicated physical property as the second user together with the first user, including: determining…for each of the multiple alternative candidate users, a second location of a second client computing device of that alternative candidate user based at least in part on one or more second electronic communications transmitted between that second client computing device and the one or more computing devices and on GPS (global positioning system) capabilities of that second client computing device, and second attributes of that alternative candidate user corresponding to prior activities accessing physical properties; ranking… each of the multiple alternative candidate users for acting as the second user based on the second location of the second client computing device of that alternative candidate user in combination with at least one physical location of the at least one indicated physical property, and of the first location for the first user, and of the first attributes of the first user, and of the second attributes of that alternative candidate user; and selecting… based at least in part on the ranking of the one alternative candidate user, the one alternative candidate user to access the at least one indicated physical property as the second user together with the first user, including verifying, via interactions of the one alternative candidate user with a second GUI displayed on the second client computing device of the one alternative candidate user, that the one alternative candidate user agrees to access the at least one indicated physical property in accordance with one or more specified conditions and for at least one availability time of the one or more first availability times; confirming… via one or more third electronic communications… scheduled access to the at least one indicated physical property for the at least one availability time by the first user and by the second user, including to cause updates to remove the at least one availability time for the at least one indicated physical property from the current availability times; updating… calendar information for at least one of the first user or the second user to reserve the at least one availability time; tracking… during a time period before the at least one availability time, updated second locations of the second client computing device of the second user and updated first locations of the first client computing device of the first user; and transmitting… during the time period, one or more fourth electronic communications to at least one of the second client computing device of the second user or the first client computing device of the first user with information based on one or more of the tracked updated second locations of the second client computing device of the second user and on one or more of the tracked updated first locations of the first client computing device; and controlling, by the one or more computing devices, access to the at least one indicated physical property for the at least the one availability time based at least in part on the tracked updated second locations of the second client computing device of the second user and the tracked updated first locations of the first client computing device. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing relationships or interactions between people then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
As per Step 2A - Prong 2 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional elements: computing devices, graphical user interface, remote computing systems, a trained neural network, non-transitory computer-readable medium, system comprising: one or more hardware processors of one or more computing devices; and one or more memories. These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic device performing a generic computer function of receiving and storing data) such that these elements amount no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Examiner looks to Applicant’s specification in at least figure 1 and related text and [0022-0023] to understand that the invention may be implemented in a generic environment that In particular, Figure 1 illustrates example client users 110 who each has a mobile client computing device 185 that has one or more types of wireless communication capabilities, such as smartphone computing devices or other mobile computing devices (e.g., a tablet, laptop, etc.), although in other embodiments some or all such client devices may be fixed-location devices and/or may not support wireless communications. The handheld client computing device 185 of example user 110a is illustrated in additional detail, such as to include a smartphone device or tablet device with a touch-sensitive display. In this example, the display is separated into sections 186a and 186b by a graphical user interface ("GUI") displayed on the device 185, with the portion 186b being used in this example to provide user-selectable functionality controls (e.g., buttons or icons), and the separate portion 186a being used to display or otherwise present various13 information to the user, although it will be appreciated that in other embodiments a device may have other types of GUIs (or no GUI), including to have both displayed information and user-selectable controls that are intermixed. In the illustrated embodiment, additional details are further shown regarding example internal components of the client device 185. In particular, in this example, client device 185 is suitable for performing at least some of the described techniques, such as by executing an embodiment of an Automated Property Access Control Manager ("APACM") client application 154 that interacts over one or more networks 170 with an embodiment of the APACM system 140 executing on one or more server computing devices/systems 180 - in other embodiments and situations, some or all of an APACM system may instead execute on each of one or more client devices 185 (e.g., in a distributed manner across multiple such client devices). Various components of the client computing device 185 are also illustrated in Figure 1, including one or more hardware processors 132 (e.g., CPUs, GPUs, etc.) that execute software (e.g., application 154, optional browser 153, etc.) using executable instructions stored and/or loaded on one or more memory/storage components 152 of the device 185, a display system 149 (e.g., including one or more displays, optionally with touch-sensitive screens), one or more control systems 147 managing I/O (input/output) and/or communications and/or networking for the device 185 (e.g., to receive instructions from and present information to an associated user) such as for the display and other device I/O and communication components 151 (e.g., network interfaces or other connections, keyboards, mice or other pointing devices, microphones, speakers, GPS receivers, etc.), one or more location sensors 134 (e.g., a GPS, or Global Positioning System, sensor or other position determination sensor), optionally other components, etc. The device 185 may store and use various types of data during operation, such as calendar data 151 for an associated user 110 to reflect one or more scheduled accesses for the user. In the illustrated embodiment, the client users 110 may include, for example, acquirer showing agent users and/or listing agent users who access and use specialized functionality of the APACM system available to them, including functionality related to participating in access14 scheduling activities available to them, such as using a first APACM client application program 154 that includes additional or different capabilities than a second APACM client application program used by other end users of client computing devices 165.” Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they are mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer.
As per Step 2B of the subject matter eligibility analysis, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements are mere instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer. When considered individually, these claim elements only contribute generic recitations of technical elements to the claims. It is readily apparent, for example, that the claim is not directed to any specific improvements of these elements and the invention is not directed to a technical improvement. When the claims are considered individually and as a whole, the additional elements noted above, appear to merely apply the abstract concept to a technical environment in a very general sense – i.e. a generic computer receives information from another generic computer, processes the information and then sends information back. In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea or that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The most significant elements of the claims, that is the elements that really outline the inventive elements of the claims, are set forth in the elements identified as an abstract idea. The fact that the generic computing devices are facilitating the abstract concept is not enough to confer statutory subject matter eligibility. In addition, the use of neural networks is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art. See, e.g., Dailey et al., US Patent No. 6,917,952 (col. 10, lines 10-12), noting that “The preferred embodiment uses neural networks, and conventional methods of training them as are known in the art.” See also, Hao et al., US 2014/0086495 (par. 73), noting “Methods for defining and training artificial neural network models are well-known to those skilled in the art, and any such method can be used in accordance with the present invention.” Accordingly, the additional element directed to a neural network fails to add significantly more to the claims.
The dependent claims further refine the abstract idea. These claims do not provide a meaningful linking to the judicial exception. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above – such as by describing the nature and content of the data that is received/sent. While these descriptive elements may provide further helpful context for the claimed invention these elements do not serve to confer subject matter eligibility to the invention since their individual and combined significance is still not significantly more than the abstract concepts at the core of the claimed invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-26 are allowable over prior art but have other pending rejections as indicated above.
The claims would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) set forth in this Office Action.
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 FRANCIS Z SANTIAGO-MERCED whose telephone number is (571)270-5562. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-4:30pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BRIAN EPSTEIN can be reached at 571-270-5389. 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.
/FRANCIS Z. SANTIAGO MERCED/Examiner, Art Unit 3625