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. The following is a non-final, first office action in response to the application filed 10 November 2023 . Applicant’s election of Group II, cancellation of Claim 2, 19 and 20 and addition of Claim 21 have been received and are acknowledged. The applicant's claim for benefit of CON of US 16/910,028 (filed 06/23/2020 ) (issued as US 11551305 ) which is a CON of 13/677,277 (filed 11/14/2022 ABN ) and has provisional application US 61/629,227 ( filed 11/14/2011 ) has been received and acknowledged. Claims 2- 1 8 and 21 are currently pending and have been examined. Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of Group 2 (Claims 2-18 ad 21) in the reply filed on 10 November 2023 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “ there is no undue burden on Examiner to consider all claims in the single application” . This is not found persuasive for the reasons given the previous office action. Further Examiner notes that the all claims but Group 2 have been cancelled as so the traverse/arguments are moot. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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 2-18 and 21 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 method for monitoring an index of quantified liquidity risk for a financial market . In the instant case, Claims 2-18 are directed to a process. Claim 21 is directed to a system. (2a) Prong 1: Monitoring an index of quantified liquidity risk for a financial market 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: Claim 2 2. (Original) A … method for monitoring an index of quantified liquidity risk for a financial market, the method comprising: determining a plurality of estimates of liquidity, wherein a respective estimate in the plurality of estimates of liquidity corresponds to a respective asset from a plurality of assets and comprises at least one of a projected trade volume capacity for the respective asset, a projected price volatility for the respective asset, a projected time to liquidate for the respective asset, a projected time to cash conversion for the respective asset, a projected market price impact for the respective asset, and a projected liquidation cost for the respective asset; generating a plurality of quantified liquidity risk indicators comprising a plurality of respective ratios for each respective asset from the plurality of assets, wherein a respective quantified liquidity risk indicator in the plurality of quantified liquidity risk indicators corresponds to the respective asset from the plurality of assets and comprises a ratio of two estimates of liquidity from the plurality of respective estimates for the respective asset; aggregating the plurality of ratios; generating an index based on aggregating the plurality of ratios for the plurality of assets; … the index over a period of time; and … in real-time or based on a user-configurable time period, via a … , the monitored index. 21. (New) A … for monitoring an index of quantified liquidity risk for a financial market, the … comprising: a … configured to: determine a plurality of estimates of liquidity, wherein a respective estimate in the plurality of estimates of liquidity corresponds to a respective asset from a plurality of assets and comprises at least one of a projected trade volume capacity for the respective asset, a projected price volatility for the respective asset, a projected time to liquidate for the respective asset, a projected time to cash conversion for the respective asset, a projected market price impact for the respective asset, and a projected liquidation cost for the respective asset; generate a plurality of quantified liquidity risk indicators comprising a plurality of respective ratios for each respective asset from the plurality of assets, wherein a respective quantified liquidity risk indicator in the plurality of quantified liquidity risk indicators corresponds to the respective asset from the plurality of assets and comprises a ratio of two estimates of liquidity from the plurality of respective estimates for the respective asset; aggregate the plurality of ratios; generate an index based on aggregating the plurality of ratios for the plurality of assets;and … the index over a period of time; and a … configured to … in real-time or based on a user- configurable time period the monitored index. 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 determining…generating… aggregating… generating… 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. monitoring… 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 or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (See MPEP 2106.05 (d), (f) and (g)) (2b) In the instant case, Claims 2-18 are directed to a process. Claim 21 is directed to a system. 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… ) 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, [60-62] computer system… graphical user interface… any suitable hardware…software…. general purpose device) The dependent claims have also been examined and do not correct the deficiencies of the independent claims. It is noted that claim s ( 3-18 ) introduces the additional element s of : wherein clauses further defining elements such as : … ratio ( Claims 3, 8 ) ; … the ranking.. (Claims 5, 7, 10, 12, );… the plurality of estimates..(Claim 13); …a respective asset…(Claim 14) ; … the aggregating… (Claim 16); … the monitoring… (Claim 17);… the index… (Claim 18) and the steps of:… ranking… (Claims 4, 9 ) … generating… (Claims 6, 11, 15). This element is 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 or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (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 the element s amoun t 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, [60-62] computer system…any suitable hardware…software…. general purpose device) Therefore, claims 2-18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter. Conclusion 12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20200034336 A1 ( Data conversion and distribution systems [97] discusses the generation of the Amihud ratio value) US 20070288336 ( Method and system for advanced Financial analysis) US 20070250436 A1 ( Algorithmic trading portal and method) US 20 1 10145126 A1 (Dynamic Selection of quoting leg based on liquidity) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHA PUTTAIAH 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 PUTTAIAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3691