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 .
Detailed Action
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/14/25 has been entered.
In amendments dated 10/14/25 Applicant amended claims 1, 3-6, 8, 10-13, and 15-16, canceled claims 2 and 9, and added no new claims. Claims 1, 3-8, and 10-20 are presented for examination.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 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, 3-8, and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental processes without significantly more. Independent claims 1, 8, and 15 each recites detecting, by the records management and processing system, outlier data in a predetermined field of one or more records of the plurality of records in the database, wherein detecting the outlier data in the predetermined field of the one or more records further comprises filtering the plurality of records in the database based on adjustments made to predetermined field, calculating a value for the predetermined field based on data in the predetermined field of each record of the filtered plurality of records in the database, and identifying the one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field based on the calculated value for the predetermined field; mapping, by the records management and processing system, each of the one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field to a batch of one or more batches of records; assigning, by the records management and processing system, each of the one or more batches of records to a category of one or more categories of records, wherein each category of the plurality of categories is associated with a predefined workflow of a plurality of predefined workflows, and wherein each workflow defines a process for handling of the plurality of records; and processing, by the records management and processing system, each of the one or more batches of records, wherein processing each of the one or more batches of records comprises executing the predefined workflow associated with the assigned category for the batch of records. Detecting outlier data is judgement and a mental process as are the actions of filtering records, calculating a value, and identifying records having outlier data which are performed using a generic computer as a tool. Mapping records, assigning batches of records to categories, and processing batches of records are each recited generally and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. . Each of these claims recites an additional element of maintaining, by a records management and processing system, a plurality of records in a database, each record of the plurality of records comprising a record of a service provided to a consumer by a service provider of a plurality of service providers and identifying a value for the service provided to the consumer and at least one required action by at least one responsible entity of a plurality of responsible entities and wherein the records management and processing system comprises an intermediary between systems of the plurality of service providers and systems of the plurality of responsible entities, and maintaining data is insignificant extra-solution activity. Claim 8 recites a processor and memory and claim 15 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising a set of instructions, which are each generic components of a computer system. Examiner notes specification paragraph 0039 describes how delays in handling records can be caused by data anomalies in records, and that said delays can be caused by a problem or potential problem with the handling of records or the performance of required actions by the responsible entity systems 320A-320C (in figure 3). Specification paragraphs 0040-55 discussing figures 3 and 4 describe actions the invention takes to address these problems of delays. Examiner does not see where the claim limitations specifically recite these actions, plus the claim steps do not recite a particular improvement in any technology or function of a computer per MPEP 2106.04(d) and do not recite any unconventional steps in the invention per MPEP 2106.05(a). Therefore, the recited mental processes are not integrated into a practical application. Taking the claims as a whole, maintaining records in a database is storing records which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2016.05(d) part II. The claimed invention recites a highly general process of storing and analyzing data using generic components of a computer system, and the amended steps for detecting outlier data are also generally recited and do not describe an improvement in a technology or to the function of a computer. Thus these claims are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited mental processes.
Dependent claims 3 and 10 each recites receiving results of a review process performed on the identified one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field (receiving data across a network is routine and conventional per list in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II); and removing at least one record from the identified one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined filed based on the received results of the review process (removing is evaluating which is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Dependent claim 16 recites receiving results of a review process performed on the identified one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field (addressed for claims 3 and 10 above); and removing at least one record from the identified one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined filed based on the received results of the review process (addressed for claims 3 and 10 above).
Dependent claims 4, 11, and 17 each recites wherein filtering the plurality of records in the database is based on one or more adjustments made to records in the plurality of records in the database (filtering is evaluating which is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Dependent claims 5, 12, and 18 each recites wherein filtering the plurality of records in the database is based on a value of a modifier stored in a field of records in the plurality of records in the database (filtering is evaluating which is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Dependent claims 6, 13, and 19 each recites wherein calculating the value for the predetermined field comprises calculating a most frequently occurring value stored in the predetermined field of the filtered records (calculating is evaluating which is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Dependent claims 7, 14, and 20 each recites wherein identifying the one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field based on the calculated value for the predetermined field comprises identifying records of the filtered records having a value stored in the predetermined field that is less than the most frequently occurring value (identifying is evaluating which is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper).
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 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.
Claims 1, 8, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Serena in view of Leung et al (US 12,456,085), hereafter Leung.
With respect to claims 1, 8, and 15, Serena teaches:
maintaining, by a records management and processing system, a plurality of records in a database, each record of the plurality of records comprising a record of a service provided to a consumer by a service provider of a plurality of service providers and identifying a value for the service provided to the consumer and at least one required action by at least one responsible entity of a plurality of responsible entities and wherein the records management and processing system comprises an intermediary between systems of the plurality of service providers and systems of the plurality of responsible entities (column 12 lines 1-40 figure 1, plurality of records 112 from database 128 comprising service records with provider information, description and charges (value for the service), payment terms as an action for the responsible entity, also column 11 lines 48-67 figure 1, records 112 from database 128, column 11 lines 4-33 database 128 on a network, column 10 lines 18-21 network connected to a provider 116 and provider device 124);
detecting, by the records management and processing system, outlier data in a predetermined field of one or more records of the plurality of records in the database (column 17 lines 5-7 and columns 23-24 lines 29-11 figure 1, detection of data outlier in data field of a record);
mapping, by the records management and processing system, each of the one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field to a batch of one or more batches of records (column 25 lines 33-50 figure 1, mapping the outlier records to a data discrepancy group);
assigning, by the records management and processing system, each of the one or more batches of records to a category of one or more categories of records, wherein each category of the plurality of categories is associated with a predefined workflow of a plurality of predefined workflows, and wherein each workflow defines a process for handling of the plurality of records (columns 26-27 lines 24-44 assign data with outliers to discrepancy groups, examples of processes for remediation/correction, columns 25-26 lines 51-55 more detail on data assigned to discrepancy groups, workflows as order of actions in discrepancy processes 148); and
processing, by the records management and processing system, each of the one or more batches of records based on, wherein processing each of the one or more batches of records comprises executing the predefined workflow associated with the assigned category for the batch of records (column 27 lines 22-44 figure 1, processing records in discrepancy group for remediation/correction to determine solutions using discrepancy processes 148 executed per columns 26-26 above).
Serena does not teach wherein detecting the outlier data in the predetermined field of the one or more records further comprises filtering the plurality of records in the database based on adjustments made to predetermined field, calculating a value for the predetermined field based on data in the predetermined field of each record of the filtered plurality of records in the database, and identifying the one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field based on the calculated value for the predetermined field.
Examiner notes the specification Abstract describes an outlier as “any data that falls above, below, and/or outside of a range from a value that is expected or which is normal for that data,” and Leung describes anomaly data similarly (column 1 lines 6-8) as “records in a sequence of records that deviate in some capacity from an expected range or trend of values.” Leung teaches detecting outlier data in a predetermined field of one or more records (column 4 lines 9-23 reviewing records to detect anomalies in a field) and teaches these things:
wherein detecting the outlier data in the predetermined field of the one or more records further comprises filtering the plurality of records in the database based on adjustments made to predetermined field (columns 5-6 lines 56-5 remove record, adjustment to the field value (removing is adjusting here)), calculating a value for the predetermined field based on data in the predetermined field of each record of the filtered plurality of records in the database (column 6 lines 6-24 calculate risk score for record of records removed), and identifying the one or more records having outlier data in the predetermined field based on the calculated value for the predetermined field (column 6 lines 6-24 identify records with anomaly based on risk score, column 6 lines 25-32 provide identified records to permutation generator 218 so identifying the anomalous records).
It would have been obvious to have combined the techniques for record handling in Serena with the techniques for detecting and removing anomalous records in Leung to provide an efficient method of said detecting and handling outlier records.
With respect to claim 8, Serena teaches a system comprising a processor and memory (column 8 lines 63-65 figure 1, apparatus for invention includes processor 104 connected to memory 108).
With respect to claim 15, Serena teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising a set of instructions thereon (column 51 lines 6-12 invention may be on a machine-readable medium storing instructions).
Relevant Prior Art
During his search for prior art, Examiner found the following reference to be relevant to Applicant's claimed invention. Said reference is listed on the Notice of References form included in this office action:
Kim (US 20210124981) teaches generating an anomaly detection model for input data, teaches similar functions for filtering records, calculating a value for a field, and identifying outlier records (paragraph 0046) but does not teach predefined workflows for categories of records and a records management function for handling records from a service provider for a customer (paragraphs 0007, 0135-0139 figure 5).
Responses to Applicant’s Remarks
Regarding rejections of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 for reciting mental processes without significantly more, Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. Examiner found discussion of the problem of delays in handling service records in specification paragraph 0039 and, while Applicant’s amendments recite related actions to the outlier detection activity, Examiner believes but said actions are recited generally and do not recite a specific solution or steps to address said problem in the art. Regarding rejections of claims 1, 8, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 by Serena, Applicant’s amendments overcome Serena’s teachings. Examiner conducted another search of the prior art and fond Leung, which Examiner believes teaches the amendments in the claims as shown in the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 above.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE M MOSER whose telephone number is (571)270-1718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Boris Gorney can be reached at 571 270-5626. 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.
/BRUCE M MOSER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154 10/30/25