201Notice 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 .
This office action is in response to communication filed on 11/28/2025.
Claims 11-12 have been cancelled. Claims 1-10 and 13-17 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, line 4 recites “to facilitate a purchase”, line 12 recites “to facilitate resolution” are not positively recited, because the purchase of line 12 and the resolution of claim 12 don’t necessarily take place.
Claim 1 lines 15-16 recites “if either the installation of the energy-related device or the communication between the energy-related device and the utility is not confirmed communicate a reminder to the customer to install the energy related device” are not positively recited, because if neither of the installation or the communication take place or the utility is not confirmed then the communication doesn’t take place.
Claim 13, lines 10-12 recite “if a matching order of an energy-related device exists and, upon finding a match, to request a product serial number from a vendor” is not positively recited if the matching of the order doesn’t exist then the request for a product serial number from the vendor doesn’t take place.
Claim 13, lines 17-19 recite “a customer communication component configured to monitor whether the energy-related device is installed and connected to a utility and to initiate communication campaigns to remind the customer to install the energy-related device if is not installed” is not positively recited because if the energy-related device is not installed then the communication component monitor doesn’t need to take place.
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.
Step 1: Determining that a claim falls within one of the four enumerated categories of patentable subject matter recited in 35 U.S.C. 101 (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). (MPEP 2106.03)
Claims 1-10 and 13-17 recite tangible system components, thus falling within one of the four statutory classes; i.e., machine.
Step 2A, Prong One: Evaluating whether the claim(s) recite(s) a judicial exception, i.e. whether a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea is set forth or described in the claim. (MPEP 2106.04).
Claim 1 recites a system with at least the following limitations:
enrolling in an energy-related demand response program for an energy-related, to direct a customer of the energy-related to a marketplace to facilitate a purchase to of the energy-related to verify an eligibility status of the energy-related and the customer for a demand response rebate and a demand response enrollment, both the demand response rebate and the demand response enrollment associated with a vendor and a utility; and apply the demand response rebate to the energy-related during purchase of the energy-related device; communicate a confirmed order of the energy-related device to the vendor and the utility to facilitate resolution of the demand response rebate; confirm an installation of the energy-related and a communication between the energy-related and the utility within a specific time period; and if either the installation of the energy-related device or the communication between the energy- related and the utility is not confirmed, but there is still time left within the specific time period, communicate a reminder to the customer to install the energy- related.
Claim 13 recites receive an order by a customer for an energy-related and to pass information about the order to a rebate redemption transaction service (RRTS) and a demand response enrollment component; receive a rebate for the customer from the RRTS based upon the information about the information; communicate with a fulfillment company regarding the order of the energy- related; and an order fulfillment component configured to: query the demand response enrollment component to determine if a matching order of an energy-related device exists and, upon finding a match, to request a product serial number from a vendor; receive confirmation from the vendor regarding an identity of the energy-related device being shipped and the product serial number; the demand response enrollment component configured to enroll the energy-related device in a demand response based upon the product serial number; and a customer communication component configured to monitor whether the energy-related is installed and connected to a utility and to initiate communication campaigns to remind the customer to install the energy-related device if it is not installed.
The claims pertain to: to initiating a campaign reminding customer to install energy related devices before a rebate deadline an under their broadest reasonable interpretation cover advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors. These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, under Prong One of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, claim 1 is an abstract idea (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
Under Prong Two of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, returning to representative claims 1 and 13, the claims recite the additional elements of computing components, e-commerce engine and server to receive, verify, apply, confirm and communicate a reminder to the customer are considered as “apply it” as the claim invokes the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) (similar to Apple, Inc, v Ameranth and Intellectual ventures I LLC v Capital One Bank (USA).
As such, under Prong Two of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, when considered both individually and as a whole, the limitations of claim 1 does not indicative of integration into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO).
Next, under Step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine if there are additional claim limitations that individually, or as an ordered combination, ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05.
As discussed above with respect to Prong Two of Step 2A, the generic recitation of computing components (i.e. processor) alone or in combination amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components.
Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept is not beyond the abstract idea to show an improvement in computer-functionality (see MPEP 2106.05(a)()). Furthermore, as discussed above with respect to Prong Two of Step 2A, claim 1 the abstract idea of initiating a campaign reminding customer to install energy related devices before a rebate deadline, do not add anything that is not already present when they are considered individually . In Alice Corp., the Court considered the additional elements “as an ordered combination,” an determined that “the computer components...‘[a]dd nothing. ..that is not already present when the steps are considered separately’ and simply recite intermediated settlement as performed by a generic computer.” Id. (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1972). Similarly, viewed as a whole, claim 1 is and abstract idea itself facilitated by generic computing components. Therefore, under Step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test, there are no meaningful limitations in claim 1 that transforms the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself (Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claims 2-10 and 14-17 are rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 based on a rationale similar to the claims from which they depend. There’re no additional elements that transform the recited abstract idea into a patent eligible invention because these claims merely recite further abstract limitations that provide no more than simply narrowing the recited abstract idea.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett (2012/0150624) in view of Thorson (2010/0050075).
With respect to claims 1 and 3 , Bennett teaches:
A system with one or more computing components (Figures 1-43) configured to:
direct a customer to a marketplace to facilitate a purchase at a frontend device (see Figure 6, 609 for offer one or more sales items):
verify an eligibility status and the customer for a response rebate (associate the at least one of the offered items with a rebate at Figure 6, 613);
apply the response rebate at the frontend device during the purchase (charge buyer an amount corresponding to the price minus the rebate at Figure 6, 621);
communicate a confirmed order to the vendor of the response rebate (see paragraph 0074 for the manufacturer/merchant environment 25 receives purchase orders to some products currently available in their inventory from the system for online sales with automatic rebate and coupon redemption 15, along with rebate and coupon information, in order to perform order fulfillment for the customer) ;
Bennett doesn’t teach remotely confirm an installation of an energy-related device and a communication between the energy-related device and the utility within a specific time period; and if either the installation of the energy-related device or the communication between the energy- related device and the utility is not confirmed, but there is still time left within the specific time period, communicate a reminder to the customer to install the energy- related device. Nevertheless, Thorson teaches on Figures 5-6 and paragraph 0127 “Display 10 permits programming reminders so that a contractor, installer or dealer can add a custom reminder that is specific to the service offered. Once set up, display 10 may display the reminder message in a manner similar to other reminders, such as a reminder to check filters”. It would have been obvious to have included in the products bought in Bennet to have included to have included the teachings of Thorson of communicating a reminder to the customer to install the service/product because such a modification would produce a timely replacement and can reduce energy consumption and buildup by installing the energy product on time.
With respect to claim 9, Bennett further teaches wherein the one or more computing devices is further configured to: respond to a customer trigger at the frontend (see Figure 2, 115 for the system 15 receives a List of Purchases);
request customer information from the customer identify one or more rebate profiles for one or more utilities that match the customer information and apply one or more rebate rules to the customer at the frontend during purchase and pass a rebate to a rebate redemption transaction service (see paragraph 0071 If the customer elects to purchase the selected products from the system for online sales with automatic rebate and coupon redemption 15, all applicable rebates and coupons are applied to the customer's purchases by the system 15).
Claims 2, 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett (2012/0150624) in view of Thorson (2010/0050075) further in view of Kwac (2015/086827).
With respect to claim 2, the combination of Bennett and Thorson do not teach, but Kwac teaches wherein the one or more computing components is further configured to present a demand response terms and conditions list at the frontend device and receive a demand response terms and conditions agreement at the frontend device “ enrolling utility customers in utility demand response or energy efficiency programs based on time-series consumption data includes collecting from smart meter sensors time-series utility consumption data from individual utility customers” (abstract). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included in the products of the combination Bennett and Thorson to have included energy related products and to have included querying the products of Bennett for demand response enrollment because such a modification would help enroll selected customers and energy related products in programs based on the solution to the optimization problem that the energy product might have.
Claims 4-5 further recite claw back/recoup the demand response rebate if the installation of the energy-related device and the communication between the energy-related device and the utility is not confirmed within the specific time period. The combination of Bennett, Kwac and Thorson teach: the demand response rebate if the installation of the energy-related device is confirmed within a specific time period. The combination of the references do not teach claw back/recoup if the installation is not confirmed within a specific time period. Official Notice is taken that it is old and well known to claw back, return back money if a customer doesn’t buy or install a product, such as paying full price for an apple product if the customer doesn’t buy the 2 year service plan. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included claw back if the installation is not confirmed within a specific time period, in order to motivate the customer to install a product or a service.
With respect to claims 6-8, the combination of Bennett, kwac and Thorson teaches enrolling the energy related device in the demand response program (see Kwac for enrolling utility customers in utility demand response or energy efficiency programs based on time-series consumption data includes collecting from smart meter sensors time-series utility consumption data from individual utility customers” (abstract). The combination of Bennett, Kwac and Thorson are silent as to the enrolling in the demand program is before or after the vendor ships the energy-related product. Official Notice is taken that enrolling the customer before the energy product ships is beneficial in order to get the person information on the demand program before they receive the product and enrolling the person after they receive the product is beneficial in order allow the customer to have more time to decide if they want to be enrolled in the program. It would haven been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included enrolling the customer before the energy product ships is beneficial in order to get the person information on the demand program before they receive the product and enrolling the person after they receive the product is beneficial in order allow the customer to have more time to decide if they want to be enrolled in the program.
With respect to claim 10, the combination of Bennett, Kwac and Thorson teach upon installation of the energy-related device and monitoring usage data (see Kwac for collecting from smart meter sensors time-series utility consumption data from individual utility customers” (abstract)). The combination of Bennerr, Kwac and Thorson is silent as to monitoring internet connection to determine if the device is connected to the network and is operational. Official Notice is taken that it is old and well known to monitor internet connection to determine if a device is connected to the network is operational. For example, checking wifi on cellular phones and the like to determine if the network is operational. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included monitor internet connection to determine if a device is connected to the network is operational, in order to better check on the network functionality.
Claims 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bennett (2012/0150624) in view of Kwac (2015/086827) further in view of Thorson (2010/0050075).
With respect to claim 13, Bennett teaches a system for demand response instant rebate checkout (Abstract).
A system for demand response instant rebate checkout (Abstract), comprising:
an e-commerce engine configured to:
receive an order by a customer and to pass information about the order to a rebate redemption transaction service (RRTS) (see Figure 2, 115 for the system 15 receives a List of Purchases);
receive a rebate for the customer from the RRTS based upon the information about the information; communicate with a fulfillment company server regarding the order (see paragraph 0071 If the customer elects to purchase the selected products from the system for online sales with automatic rebate and coupon redemption 15, all applicable rebates and coupons are applied to the customer's purchases by the system 15);
an order fulfillment component configured to: determine if a matching order exists and receive confirmation from the vendor regarding an identity of item to be shipped and the product serial number (see paragraph 0082 for the system 15 receives a List of Purchases or Shopping Cart 115 from customers. In response, it prices the shopping cart and automatically applies all relevant rebates and coupons to the various products in the shopping cart. It then performs order fulfillment activities to ship the products to the customer).
Bennet is silent as to a demand enrollment component of an energy related device and query the demand response enrollment; the demand response enrollment component configured to enroll in a demand response. On the other hand, Kwac teaches “ enrolling utility customers in utility demand response or energy efficiency programs based on time-series consumption data includes collecting from smart meter sensors time-series utility consumption data from individual utility customers” (abstract). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included in the products of Bennett to have been energy related products and to have included querying the products of Bennett for demand response enrollment because such a modification would help enroll selected customers and energy related products in programs based on the solution to the optimization problem that the energy product might have.
The combination of Bennett and Kwac do not teach a customer communication component configured to monitor whether the energy-related device is installed and connected to a utility and to initiate communication campaigns to remind the customer to install the energy-related device if it is not installed. Nevertheless, Thorson teaches on Figures 5-6 and paragraph 0127 “Display 10 permits programming reminders so that a contractor, installer or dealer can add a custom reminder that is specific to the service offered. Once set up, display 10 may display the reminder message in a manner similar to other reminders, such as a reminder to check filters”. It would have been obvious to have included in the products bought in Bennet to have included to have included the teachings of Thorson of communicating a reminder to the customer to install the service/product because such a modification would produce a timely replacement and can reduce energy consumption and buildup by installing the energy product on time.
With respect to claim 14, Kwac teaches wherein the one or more computing components is further configured to present a demand response terms and conditions list at the frontend device and receive a demand response terms and conditions agreement at the frontend device “ enrolling utility customers in utility demand response or energy efficiency programs based on time-series consumption data includes collecting from smart meter sensors time-series utility consumption data from individual utility customers” (abstract). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included in the products of the combination Bennett to have included energy related products and to have included querying the products of Bennett for demand response enrollment because such a modification would help enroll selected customers and energy related products in programs based on the solution to the optimization problem that the energy product might have.
Claims 15-16 further recite claw back/recoup the demand response rebate if the installation of the energy-related device and the communication between the energy-related device and the utility is not confirmed within the specific time period. The combination of Bennett, Kwac and Thorson teach: the demand response rebate if the installation of the energy-related device is confirmed within a specific time period. The combination of the references do not teach claw back/recoup if the installation is not confirmed within a specific time period. Official Notice is taken that it is old and well known to claw back, return back money if a customer doesn’t buy or install a product, such as paying full price for an apple product if the customer doesn’t buy the 2 year service plan. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included claw back if the installation is not confirmed within a specific time period, in order to motivate the customer to install a product or a service.
With respect to claim 17, Kwac teaches enrolling the energy related device in the demand response program (enrolling utility customers in utility demand response or energy efficiency programs based on time-series consumption data includes collecting from smart meter sensors time-series utility consumption data from individual utility customers” (abstract). The combination of Bennett, Kwac and Thorson are silent as to the enrolling in the demand program is prior to fulfillment. Official Notice is taken that enrolling the customer prior to fulfilment of the energy product is beneficial in order to get the person information on the demand program before they receive the product will allow the customer to have more time to decide if they want to be enrolled in the program. It would haven been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have included enrolling the customer before fulfillment in order allow the customer to have more time to decide if they want to be enrolled in the program.
Refences of record but not applied in the current rejections:
Elkins et al. (7,720,708) teaches sending reminders to the customer prior to refund window expirations, such reminders optionally containing hold incentives, release incentives, promotions, special offers, and ads with the capability to influence demand and transact additional business.
Moryto (2009/0070273) teaches convenient reminders of warranty expirations or rebate deadlines, and detailed documentation of a product's ownership history.
Walker et al.(2002/0147663) teaches a third party subsidy offer, such as an offer to apply a third party subsidy amount to the transaction in exchange for the customer performing a task, is provided to the customer. The third party subsidy offer may be provided to the customer in response to the customer indicating an interest in purchasing the item.
Miller et al. (2009/0259538) teaches online rebate system allows purchasers of products to gain nearly immediate determinations of whether they are eligible for any rebates. In one embodiment, a purchaser can provide a transaction identifier for a prior purchase transaction to the online rebate system, and then the online rebate system can examine the transaction, including the products purchased, to determine in near real-time whether the purchaser is entitled to a rebate.
“Simple Energy” Demand Response Enrollment Center Overview: teaches an instant rebate of $134 off a smart thermostat with your NYSEG rebate and Smart savings rewards enrollement.
KR 1020140088093 Coupons.com Incorporated, teaches the coupon information is electrically provided with the receipt about the transactions at the actual store and/or the on-line shop. The retail trader allows to perform the transactions in which at least one articles are purchased. The interface which is configured to receive the input showing the customer identifier (customer identifier) (the e-mail address etc) related to the transactions is provided. When the input is received through the interface the identifier is relate d to the guest id of the base the input is determined. The case where the customer identifier is related to ID of the base, and digital coupons related to the ID are applied to the transactions.
Fergis (2016/0371762) teaches systems and methods for providing energy product recommendations consistent with economic criteria” title and on paragraphs 0044, 0055 product rebates D202 and utility company incentives D201.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAQUEL ALVAREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6715. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays thru Thursdays 8:30-6:30.
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, Ilana Spar can be reached at 571-270-7537. 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.
/RAQUEL ALVAREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3622