Detailed Action
This action is in response to application filed on 08/28/2023
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 12/15/2025 and 07/23/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings submitted on 08/28/2023 are accepted.
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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Representative claim 1 is directed to a method for providing a resource allocation recommendation message to a user, the method comprising:
identifying, by user evaluation circuitry, a predicted liquid asset influx that is associated with the user, wherein the predicted liquid asset influx is also associated with an event time frame;
determining, by the user evaluation circuitry, a current resource metric set, wherein the current resource metric set comprises a user account metric set and a user contribution metric set;
generating, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the predicted liquid asset influx and the current resource metric set, the resource allocation recommendation message, wherein the resource allocation recommendation message comprises one or more resource allocation recommendations that are each associated with (i) a user account of the one or more user accounts associated with the user or a new user account type and (ii) a resource allocation value; and
providing, by communications hardware, the resource allocation recommendation message.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized element/concepts are not meaningfully different than those concepts found by the courts to be abstract, namely,
Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity including fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk) commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)
For instance, humans can mentally and/or via aid of pen/paper perform various human activities including method for providing a resource allocation recommendation message to a user, the method comprising: identifying a predicted liquid asset influx that is associated with the user, wherein the predicted liquid asset influx is also associated with an event time frame; determining a current resource metric set, wherein the current resource metric set comprises a user account metric set and a user contribution metric set; generating mentally and/or via pen paper, based on the predicted liquid asset influx and the current resource metric set, the resource allocation recommendation message, wherein the resource allocation recommendation message comprises one or more resource allocation recommendations that are each associated with (i) a user account of the one or more user accounts associated with the user or a new user account type and (ii) a resource allocation value; and providing mentally/via pen paper, the resource allocation recommendation message.
Per prong 2, Step 2A, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating/providing of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
Per Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating/providing of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(d, f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results. Accordingly, the above limitations singularly or in combination do not result in the claim as a whole amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Accordingly, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claims 11 and 20 apparatus and medium claims corresponding to method claim 1 and are of substantially same scope.
Accordingly, claims 11 and 20 are rejected under the same rational as set forth for claim 1.
Dependent claims 2-10, and 12-19 when considered individually or in combination per steps as noted above are rejected under the same rational as set forth above for claims 1, 11, and 20. In particular:
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, further recites further comprising: analyzing, by the user evaluation circuitry, one or more user accounts associated with a user profile that is associated with the user; and determining, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the analysis of the one or more user accounts, one or more user account metrics for the one or more user accounts associated with the user profile, wherein (i) the one or more user account metrics are included in the user account metric set and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendation is further based on the one or more user account metrics.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporate, further recites further comprising: analyzing, by the user evaluation circuitry, one or more user accounts associated with a user profile that is associated with the user; and determining, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the analysis of the one or more user accounts, one or more user contribution metrics for one or more contribution fields, wherein (i) the one or more user contribution metrics are included in the user contribution metric set and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations is further based on the one or more user contribution metrics.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, further recites further comprising; providing, by the communications hardware, a user account metric request to a third-party entity; and receiving, by the communications hardware, a user account metric response, wherein (i) the user account metric response includes one or more user account metrics for one or more user accounts of the user associated with the third-party entity, (ii) the one or more received user account metrics are included in the user contribution metric set, and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations is further based on the one or more received user account metrics.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “providing, by the communications hardware, a user account metric request to a third-party entity; and receiving, by the communications hardware, a user account metric response, wherein (i) the user account metric response includes one or more user account metrics for one or more user accounts of the user associated with the third-party entity, (ii) the one or more received user account metrics are included in the user contribution metric set”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 further incorporated, further recites further comprising: determining, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the one or more received user account metrics, one or more user contribution metrics for one or more contribution fields, wherein (i) the one or more determined user contribution metrics are included in the user contribution metric set and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations is further based on the one or more determined user contribution metrics.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, further recites 6. wherein a total value of each recommended resource allocation value is equivalent to the predicted liquid asset influx.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper to make determinations/calculations (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, further recites, wherein the one or more user accounts associated with the user comprise one or more of a savings user account, a checking user account, a credit card user account, a user investment account, or a user loan account.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “the one or more user accounts associated with the user comprise one or more of a savings user account, a checking user account, a credit card user account, a user investment account, or a user loan account”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, recites further comprising: generating, by the user evaluation circuitry, a forecast resource metric set, wherein (i) the forecast resource metric set comprises one or more forecast user account metrics, (ii) each forecast user account metric corresponds to a particular user account or contribution field, (iii) the one or more forecast user account metrics are determined based on a corresponding user account metric or user contribution metric and a corresponding recommended resource allocation value, and (iv) the resource allocation recommendation message further comprises the forecast resource metric set.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper to make determinations/calculations (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, further recites further comprising: generating, by the user evaluation circuitry, supplemental information for the resource allocation recommendation, wherein the supplemental information is indicative of a reason for a resource allocation recommendation and (ii) the resource allocation recommendation message further comprises the supplemental information.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper to make determinations/calculations (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “[using] user evaluation circuitry and communications hardware” and for arguments sake “generating of resource allocation message”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, further recites further comprising: receiving, by the communications hardware, a resource allocation recommendation authorization from the user; and causing, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the one or more resource allocation recommendations, an automatic re-allocation of the predicted liquid asset influx.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized limitations are Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper to make determinations/calculations (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “receiving, by the communications hardware, a resource allocation recommendation authorization from the user; and causing, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the one or more resource allocation recommendations, an automatic [re-allocation]”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
As per claims 11-19:
Claims 11-19 are apparatus claims corresponding to method claims 1-9 and are of substantially same scope. Accordingly, claims 11-19 are rejected under the same rational as set forth for claims 1-9.
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to abstract idea.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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 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 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.
Claim 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (US 20240135455 A1, referred hereinafter as D1) in view of Katz et al. (US 20220147895 A1, referred hereinafter as D2).
As per claim 1, D1 discloses,
A method for providing a resource allocation recommendation message to a user, the method comprising, (D1, title., 0042 discloses automatically allocating funds and providing alerts/messages to user accordingly.).
identifying, by user evaluation circuitry, a [past and/or expected future income] that is associated with the user, wherein the [past and/or expected future income] is also associated with an event time frame, (D1, 0048 discloses system of D1 identifying/using a past and/or expected future income that is associated with the user, wherein the past and/or expected future income is also associated with an event time frame (e.g. past and future income expectations).).
determining, by the user evaluation circuitry, a current resource metric set, wherein the current resource metric set comprises a user account metric set and a user contribution metric set, (D1, figure 4, 0042, 0048 discloses system of D1 receiving/determining a current resource metric set, wherein the current resource metric set comprises a user account metric set and a user contribution metric set (e.g. various user accounts information as noted in least paragraphs 0048) including “For example, the financial information can be retrieved from the user's checking and savings accounts associated with one or more banking institutions. As another nonlimiting example, the processor may retrieve information from a third party application such as a financial planning application. The financial information can include without limitation past and present income, future expected income, credit history, asset history, investment history, tax history, savings history, spending habits, financial goals, student loan debt, housing debt, credit card debt, and other debts. Financial information can also include the user's self-reported financial agenda, such as a plan to buy a house, buy a car, save for an education, save for a wedding, save for children, getting a raise, getting a promotion, switching careers, taking a sabbatical, and other significant financial events. It is understood that other information besides financial information can be retrieved, such as marital status, children status, education status, employment status, geographic location, and zip code. It is also understood that this information can be provided the by the user's employer. As a nonlimiting example, the employer can provide information associated with the user's career, 401(k), health savings account (HSA), IRA accounts, 529 accounts, custodial accounts, other savings accounts, and other investment accounts”.).
generating, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the [past/future income] and the current resource metric set, the resource allocation recommendation message, (D1, figure 4, 0042, 0048 discloses system of D1 receiving/determining a current resource metric set, wherein the current resource metric set comprises a user account metric set and a user contribution metric set (e.g. various user accounts information as noted in least paragraphs 0048) and generating, based on the past/future income information and the current resource metric set (e.g. spending limits, user self-reported agenda, buy house/car etc.), resource allocation to various old/new accounts and providing the resource allocation recommendation message/alert.).
wherein the resource allocation recommendation message comprises one or more resource allocation recommendations that are each associated with (i) a user account of the one or more user accounts associated with the user or a new user account type and (ii) a resource allocation value; and providing, by communications hardware, the resource allocation recommendation message, (D1, figure 4, 0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/determining a current resource metric set, wherein the current resource metric set comprises a user account metric set and a user contribution metric set (e.g. various user accounts information as noted in least paragraphs 0048) and generating, based on the past/future income information and the current resource metric set (e.g. user self-reported agenda, buy house/car etc.), resource allocation and providing the resource allocation recommendation message/alert based on which a user may adjust allocations which reads on resource allocation recommendation message comprises one or more resource allocation recommendations that are each associated with (i) a user account of the one or more user accounts associated with the user or a new user account type and (ii) a resource allocation value; and providing, by communications hardware, the resource allocation recommendation message. The examiner notes the content of recommendation message is merely non-functional descriptive material, is given little to no patentable weight and is properly construed as mere data.).
D1 fails to expressly disclose - a predicted liquid asset influx… associated with event time frame.
D2 (0055-0058, 0076, figure 4) disclose generating a predicted liquid asset influx (cash inflow) associated with event time frame shown in figure 3, as well alerts/insights/recommendations to a user which additionally reads on allocation recommendation message comprises one or more resource allocation recommendations that are each associated with (i) a user account of the one or more user accounts associated with the user or a new user account type and (ii) a resource allocation value; and providing, by communications hardware, the resource allocation recommendation message.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of generating predicted inflow/outflow activity and accordingly providing actionable insights/recommendation to users based on the predicted inflow/outflow activities as disclosed by D2 (0076).
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
further comprising: analyzing, by the user evaluation circuitry, one or more user accounts associated with a user profile that is associated with the user, (D1, figure 4, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/financial data that is associated with the user).
and determining, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the analysis of the one or more user accounts, one or more user account metrics for the one or more user accounts associated with the user profile, wherein (i) the one or more user account metrics are included in the user account metric set and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendation is further based on the one or more user account metrics (D1, figure 4-5, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/user financial data that is associated with the user and determining based on the analysis of the one or more user accounts/financial information, one or more user account metrics (e.g. user goals, spending limits etc.) for the one or more user accounts associated with the user profile, wherein (i) the one or more user account metrics are included in the user account metric set (e.g. user goals, spending limits etc.) and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendation is further based on the one or more user account metrics (e.g. alerts)). .
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
further comprising: analyzing, by the user evaluation circuitry, one or more user accounts associated with a user profile that is associated with the user, (D1, figure 4, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/financial data that is associated with the user).
and determining, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the analysis of the one or more user accounts, one or more user contribution metrics for one or more contribution fields, wherein (i) the one or more user contribution metrics are included in the user contribution metric set and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations is further based on the one or more user contribution metrics, (D1, figure 4-5, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/user financial data that is associated with the user and determining based on the analysis of the one or more user accounts/financial information, one or more user contribution metrics for one or more contribution fields (e.g. user goals, spending limits etc.), wherein (i) the one or more user contribution metrics are included in the user contribution metric set and (e.g. user goals, spending limits etc.) and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations is further based on the one or more user contribution metrics (e.g. alerts)). .
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
further comprising… by the communications hardware, a user account metric [retrieved from] a third-party entity, and receiving, by the communications hardware, a user account metric response, wherein (i) the user account metric response includes one or more user account metrics for one or more user accounts of the user associated with the third-party entity, (ii) the one or more received user account metrics are included in the user contribution metric set, (D1, 0040 discloses system of D1 retrieving financial data/metrics from a third party system, users, accounts wherein information includes financial information can include without limitation past and present income, future expected income, credit history, asset history, investment history, tax history, savings history, spending habits or patterns, financial goals, student loan debt, housing debt, credit card debt, and other debts. Spending habits or spending patterns can include how much is spent on certain products or services in a given pay period. For example, a spending pattern can reveal that the user spends fifty percent of their income on rent, twenty percent on food, ten percent on traveling, and twenty percent on other consumer goods. As another example, a spending habit can reveal that the user spends more of their income on gifts and traveling during the holiday season. Financial information can also include the user's self-reported financial agenda, such as a plan to buy a house, buy a car, save for an education, save for a wedding, save for children, getting a raise, getting a promotion, switching careers, taking a sabbatical, and other significant financial events. It is understood that other information besides financial information can be retrieved, such as marital status, children status, education status, employment status, geographic location, and zip code. It is also understood that this information can be provided the by the user's employer. As a nonlimiting example, the employer can provide information associated with the user's career, 401(k), health savings account (HSA), IRA accounts, 529 accounts, custodial accounts, other savings accounts, and other investment accounts. ).
and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations is further based on the one or more received user account metrics, (D1, figure 4-5, 0042, 0048-0050 discloses generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations/alerts is further based on the one or more received user account metrics (e.g. spending limits, user goals etc.).).
D1 disclose communication hardware and third party system/entity; however, D1 fails to expressly disclose - further comprising; providing, a user account metric request to a third- party entity.
However, D2 (0026, 0071) disclose of using API to provide, a user account metric request to a third- party entity/banks in order retrieve historical financial data.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of generating predicted inflow/outflow activity and accordingly providing actionable insights/recommendation to users based on the predicted inflow/outflow activities as disclosed by D2 (0076).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
further comprising: determining, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the one or more received user account metrics, one or more user contribution metrics for one or more contribution fields, wherein (i) the one or more determined user contribution metrics are included in the user contribution metric set and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations is further based on the one or more determined user contribution metrics, (D1, figure 4-5, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/user financial data that is associated with the user and determining, based on the one or more received user account metrics (e.g. financial data), one or more user contribution metrics (e.g. spending limits, user goals) for one or more contribution fields (e.g. users goals of buying house, car, savings, spending), wherein (i) the one or more determined user contribution metrics are included in the user contribution metric set (e.g. spending limit) and (ii) generating the one or more resource allocation recommendations (e.g. generating/creating accounts to allocate funds in and generate alerts) is further based on the one or more determined user contribution metrics (e.g. approaching spending limits alerts)). .
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein a total value of each recommended resource allocation value is equivalent to [past/future income/savings] …, (D1, figures 4-5, 0048-0050 discloses allocating funds to various accounts within constrains as determined or supplied by user which reads on and/or discloses use case scenarios of a total value of each recommended resource allocation value (e.g. saving assets in saving account based on significant financial event and among other accounts) is equivalent to past/future income/savings as disclosed.).
D1 fails to expressly disclose - the predicted liquid asset influx.
D2 (0055-0058, 0076, figure 4) disclose generating a predicted liquid asset influx (cash inflow) associated with event time frame shown in figure 3, as well alerts/insights/recommendations to a user which additionally reads on allocation recommendation message comprises one or more resource allocation recommendations that are each associated with (i) a user account of the one or more user accounts associated with the user or a new user account type and (ii) a resource allocation value; and providing, by communications hardware, the resource allocation recommendation message.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of generating predicted inflow/outflow activity and accordingly providing actionable insights/recommendation to users based on the predicted inflow/outflow activities as disclosed by D2 (0076).
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the one or more user accounts associated with the user comprise one or more of a savings user account, a checking user account, a credit card user account, a user investment account, or a user loan account, (D1, figures 4-5, 0048-0050 discloses various accounts including savings/checking, credit, and/or 401k etc.).
As per claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
further comprising: generating, by the user evaluation circuitry, a forecast resource metric set, wherein (i) the forecast resource metric set comprises one or more forecast user account metrics, (ii) each forecast user account metric corresponds to a particular user account or contribution field, (iii) the one or more forecast user account metrics are determined based on a corresponding user account metric or user contribution metric and a corresponding recommended resource allocation value, and (iv) the resource allocation recommendation message further comprises the forecast resource metric set, (D1, figure 4-5, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/user financial data that is associated with the user and generating, by the user evaluation circuitry, a forecast resource metric set (e.g. spending limit, approaching spending limit), wherein (i) the forecast resource metric set comprises one or more forecast user account metrics (e.g. approaching spending limit), (ii) each forecast user account metric corresponds to a particular user account or contribution field (e.g. spending limit approaching for spending account) , (iii) the one or more forecast user account metrics are determined based on a corresponding user account metric or user contribution metric (e.g. calculated spending limit) and a corresponding recommended resource allocation value (e.g. account allocation, calculated spending limit and alert), and (iv) the resource allocation recommendation message further comprises the forecast resource metric set (e.g. alert, where message is merely non-functional descriptive material). Furthermore, D2 (0055-0058, 0076, figure 4) disclose shown in figure 3, alerts/insights/recommendations to a user which additionally reads on above recited limitations.).
As per claim 9, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
further comprising: generating, by the user evaluation circuitry, supplemental information for the resource allocation recommendation, wherein the supplemental information is indicative of a reason for a resource allocation recommendation and (ii) the resource allocation recommendation message further comprises the supplemental information, (D1, figure 4-5, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/user financial data that is associated with the user and generating, by the user evaluation circuitry, supplemental information/alerts for the resource allocation recommendation/alerts/message, wherein the supplemental information is indicative of a reason for a resource allocation recommendation (e.g. alerts) and (ii) the resource allocation recommendation message further comprises the supplemental information), where content of the message is merely non-functional descriptive material. Furthermore, D2 (0055-0058, 0076, figure 4) disclose shown in figure 3, alerts/insights/recommendations to a user which additionally reads on above recited limitations).
As per claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
further comprising: receiving, by the communications hardware, a resource allocation recommendation authorization from the user; and causing, by the user evaluation circuitry and based on the one or more resource allocation recommendations, an automatic re-allocation of the [income], (D1, figure 4-5, 0041-0042, 0048-0050 discloses system of D1 receiving/analyzing (see figure steps 410-430) one or more user accounts associated with a user profile/social media profile/user financial data that is associated with the user and receiving, a resource allocation recommendation authorization from the user (e.g. figure 4, step 440); and causing, based on the one or more resource allocation recommendations (e.g. alert and request to adjust allocation per step 440 of figure 4), an automatic re-allocation of the funds (e.g. see figure 4, steps 445-450)).
D1 fails to expressly disclose - predicted liquid asset influx.
D2 (0055-0058, 0076, figure 4) disclose generating a predicted liquid asset influx (cash inflow) associated with event time frame shown in figure 3.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of generating predicted inflow/outflow activity and accordingly providing actionable insights/recommendation to users based on the predicted inflow/outflow activities as disclosed by D2 (0076).
As per claims 11-20:
Claims 11-20 are apparatus and medium claims corresponding to method claims 1-9 and are of substantially same scope. Accordingly, claims 11-20 are rejected under the same rational as set forth for claims 1-9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
OUTCOME PREDICTION SYSTEMS AND USER INTERFACES FOR CUSTOMIZABLE USER PLANS
DOCUMENT ID
US 20230237582 A1
DATE PUBLISHED
2023-07-27
Abstract
A graphical user interface (GUI) includes a visual representation of projections over time for a user. The GUI calls a planning engine through an application programming interface (API) where calling the planning engine causes the planning engine to retrieve user profile data of the user, generate a predicted outcome for the user based on the user profile data, and return the predicted outcome to the GUI. In response to receiving the predicted outcome from the planning engine, the GUI updates updating the visual representation based on the predicted outcome. Certain implementations may include multiple planning engines, each with respective APIs, and/or reconfigurable planning engines.
COMPUTING DEVICE AND METHOD FOR THE TEMPORAL ARRANGEMENT OF DATA
DOCUMENT ID
US 20180101902 A1
DATE PUBLISHED
2018-04-12
Abstract
A device and method for management of an account. An event placement timeline is displayed. Account events are shown along the timeline. A preferred event time range or “safe zone” is shown along the timeline. The “safe zone” is the portion of the month during which it is safe to schedule certain events, like bill payments, with lower risk of NSF, overdraft or the like. The user moves a movable object into the “safe zone” to reschedule the account event in the “safe zone”, and the settings of the account are modified to automatically execute the account event at that time.
See form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSTAFA A AMIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3181. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Young, can be reached on 571-270-3180. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MUSTAFA A AMIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2194