Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/523,809

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MODIFYING A SAVINGS PLAN BASED ON USER DATA

Final Rejection §101§103
Filed
Nov 29, 2023
Examiner
EKECHUKWU, CHINEDU U
Art Unit
3695
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Wells Fargo Bank N A
OA Round
2 (Final)
1%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 10m
To Grant
3%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 1% of cases
1%
Career Allow Rate
2 granted / 195 resolved
-51.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+1.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 10m
Avg Prosecution
62 currently pending
Career history
257
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
37.9%
-2.1% vs TC avg
§103
36.6%
-3.4% vs TC avg
§102
11.3%
-28.7% vs TC avg
§112
13.5%
-26.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 195 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §103
DETAILED ACTION 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 . This is a Final Office Action in response to application 18/523,809 entitled "SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MODIFYING A SAVINGS PLAN BASED ON USER DATA" filed on July 17, 2025, with claims 1 to 21 pending. Status of Claims Claims 1, 10, and 19 have been amended and are hereby entered. Claim 21 is added and has been examined. Claims 1-21 are pending and have been examined. Response to Amendment The amendment filed July 17, 2025has been entered. Claims 1-21 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings, and/or Claims have been noted in response to the Non-Final Office Action mailed April 17, 2025. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 29, 2023, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner. 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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Please see MPEP 2106 for additional information regarding Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance. Claims 1-21 are directed to a system, method/process, machine/apparatus, or composition of matter, which are/is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES). The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Independent Claim 1 recites: “A method for modifying a savings plan based on user data, the method comprising: receiving, …personalized data related to a user, anonymized data related to a group of users, and a savings plan related to the user; providing,…. the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan to a …model; generating, …and using the …model, a plan update recommendation based on the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan, wherein the plan update recommendation comprises a goal transaction that is made available upon executing a set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions, wherein the set of pre-condition transactions includes at least one of a purchase or a deposit; generating, …a counterfactual scenario based on the savings plan and the plan update recommendation, wherein the counterfactual scenario comprises the set of pre- determined pre-condition transactions and a set of outcome changes based on applying the plan update recommendation to the savings plan and further based on behavior of the user from the personalized data; presenting, …the plan update recommendation and the counterfactual scenario to the user; receiving…and from the user, an indication of a response to the plan update recommendation; and in an instance in which the user accepts the plan update recommendation, updating, …the savings plan according to the plan update recommendation to produce an updated savings plan; receiving, …, transaction data related to the updated savings plan comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions; and in an instance in which comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre- condition transactions indicates that the transaction data satisfies conditions of the updated savings plan, causing, by the plan…, execution of the goal transaction involving the user and based on the updated savings plan.” These limitations clearly relate to managing financial planning. These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. Specific instances include instructing to “modifying a savings plan” and “providing... the savings plan” and “updating...the savings plan according to the plan update recommendation” recite a fundamental economic principles or practice and/or commercial or legal interactions. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as a fundamental economic, commercial, or financial action, principle, or practice then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of: [by communications hardware,] [by plan circuitry,] [by scenario circuitry,] [by the communications hardware,]: merely applying computer processing, storage, and networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea [generative artificial intelligence (GAI)] [GAI]: merely applying machine learning technology as tools to perform an abstract idea are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads: [0018] The term “computing device” refers to any one or all …. computers, desktop computers, personal data assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, tablet computers...personal computers, smartphones, wearable devices...and similar electronic devices equipped with at least a processor and any other physical components necessarily to perform the various operations described herein. Devices such as smartphones, laptop computers, tablet computers, and wearable devices are generally collectively referred to as mobile devices. [0023] Example embodiments described herein may be implemented using any of a variety of computing devices or servers. [0025] The user device 106, social media interface 108, and one or more user community devices 110A-110N may be embodied by any computing devices known in the art. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, Claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application) Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. The claim further defines the abstract idea and hence is abstract for the reasons presented above. The claim does not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claim does not provide significantly more) Dependent Claims recite additional elements. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the recited additional elements of Claim 2: “by the plan circuitry”, “by the communications hardware”: merely applying computer processing, networking, and display technologies as a tool to perform an abstract idea Claims 3-6: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea) Claim 7: “by the communications hardware”: merely applying computer processing, networking, and display technologies as a tool to perform an abstract idea Claim 8: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea) Claim 9: “by the communications hardware”: merely applying computer processing, networking, and display technologies as a tool to perform an abstract idea Claim 21: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea) are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads: [0018] The term “computing device” refers to any one or all …. computers, desktop computers, personal data assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, tablet computers...personal computers, smartphones, wearable devices...and similar electronic devices equipped with at least a processor and any other physical components necessarily to perform the various operations described herein. Devices such as smartphones, laptop computers, tablet computers, and wearable devices are generally collectively referred to as mobile devices. [0023] Example embodiments described herein may be implemented using any of a variety of computing devices or servers. [0025] The user device 106, social media interface 108, and one or more user community devices 110A-110N may be embodied by any computing devices known in the art. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application) Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. Dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the dependent claims are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more) Independent Claim 10 recites: “An apparatus for modifying a savings plan based on user data, the apparatus comprising: …configured to receive personalized data related to a user, anonymized data related to a group of users, and a savings plan related to the user; …configured to: provide the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan to a …model, and generate, using the … model, a plan update recommendation based on the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan, wherein the plan update recommendation comprises a goal transaction that is made available upon executing a set of pre- determined pre-condition transactions, wherein the set of pre-condition transactions includes at least one of a purchase or a deposit; …configured to generate a counterfactual scenario based on the savings plan and the plan update recommendation, wherein the counterfactual scenario comprises the set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions and a set of outcome changes based on applying the plan update recommendation to the savings plan and further based on behavior of the user from the personalized data, wherein …is further configured to: present the plan update recommendation and the counterfactual scenario to the user, and receive, from the user, an indication of a response to the plan update recommendation, wherein ….is further configured to, in an instance in which the user accepts the plan update recommendation, update the savings plan according to the plan update recommendation to produce an updated savings plan; wherein the communications hardware is further configured to receive transaction data related to the updated savings plan; wherein … is further configured to: compare the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions, and in an instance in which comparing the transaction data to the set of pre- determined pre-condition transactions indicate that the transaction data satisfies conditions of the updated savings plan, cause execution of the goal transaction involving the user and based on the updated savings plan.” These limitations clearly relate to managing financial planning. These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. Specific instances include instructing to “modifying a savings plan” and “provide... the savings plan” and “updating...the savings plan according to the plan update recommendation” recite a fundamental economic principles or practice and/or commercial or legal interactions. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as a fundamental economic, commercial, or financial action, principle, or practice then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of: [by communications hardware,] [by plan circuitry,] [by scenario circuitry,] [by the communications hardware,]: merely applying computer processing, storage, and networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea [GAI]: merely applying machine learning technology as tools to perform an abstract idea are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads: [0018] The term “computing device” refers to any one or all …. computers, desktop computers, personal data assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, tablet computers...personal computers, smartphones, wearable devices...and similar electronic devices equipped with at least a processor and any other physical components necessarily to perform the various operations described herein. Devices such as smartphones, laptop computers, tablet computers, and wearable devices are generally collectively referred to as mobile devices. [0023] Example embodiments described herein may be implemented using any of a variety of computing devices or servers. [0025] The user device 106, social media interface 108, and one or more user community devices 110A-110N may be embodied by any computing devices known in the art. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, Claim 10 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application) Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. The claim further defines the abstract idea and hence is abstract for the reasons presented above. The claim does not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claim does not provide significantly more) Dependent Claims recite additional elements. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the recited additional elements of Claim 11: “plan circuitry”: merely applying computer processing, networking, and display technologies as a tool to perform an abstract idea Claims 12-15: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea) Claim 16: “communications hardware”: merely applying computer processing, networking, and display technologies as a tool to perform an abstract idea Claim 17: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea) Claim 18: “the communications hardware”: merely applying computer processing, networking, and display technologies as a tool to perform an abstract idea are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads: [0018] The term “computing device” refers to any one or all …. computers, desktop computers, personal data assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, tablet computers...personal computers, smartphones, wearable devices...and similar electronic devices equipped with at least a processor and any other physical components necessarily to perform the various operations described herein. Devices such as smartphones, laptop computers, tablet computers, and wearable devices are generally collectively referred to as mobile devices. [0023] Example embodiments described herein may be implemented using any of a variety of computing devices or servers. [0025] The user device 106, social media interface 108, and one or more user community devices 110A-110N may be embodied by any computing devices known in the art. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application) Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. Dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the dependent claims are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more) Independent Claim 19 recites: “A computer program product for modifying a savings plan based on user data, the computer program product comprising …cause an apparatus to: receive personalized data related to a user, anonymized data related to a group of users, and a savings plan related to the user; provide the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan to a…model; generate, using the … model, a plan update recommendation based on the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan, wherein the plan update recommendation comprises a goal transaction that is made available upon executing a set of pre-determined pre- condition transactions, wherein the set of pre-condition transactions includes at least one of a purchase or a deposit; generate a counterfactual scenario based on the savings plan and the plan update recommendation, wherein the counterfactual scenario comprises the set of pre-determined pre- condition transactions and a set of outcome changes based on applying the plan update recommendation to the savings plan and further based on behavior of the user from the personalized data; present the plan update recommendation and the counterfactual scenario to the user; receive, from the user, an indication of a response to the plan update recommendation; in an instance in which the user accepts the plan update recommendation, update the savings plan according to the plan update recommendation to produce an updated savings plan; receiving transaction data related to the updated savings plan; comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions; and in an instance in which comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre- condition transactions indicates that the transaction data satisfies conditions of the updated savings plan, causing execution of the goal transaction involving the user and based on the updated savings plan.” These limitations clearly relate to managing financial planning. These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. Specific instances include instructing to “modifying a savings plan” and “provide... the savings plan” and “updating...the savings plan according to the plan update recommendation” recite a fundamental economic principles or practice and/or commercial or legal interactions. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as a fundamental economic, commercial, or financial action, principle, or practice then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements of: [at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing software instructions that, when executed]: merely applying computer processing, storage, and networking technology as tools to perform an abstract idea [GAI]: merely applying machine learning technology as tools to perform an abstract idea are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads: [0018] The term “computing device” refers to any one or all …. computers, desktop computers, personal data assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, tablet computers...personal computers, smartphones, wearable devices...and similar electronic devices equipped with at least a processor and any other physical components necessarily to perform the various operations described herein. Devices such as smartphones, laptop computers, tablet computers, and wearable devices are generally collectively referred to as mobile devices. [0023] Example embodiments described herein may be implemented using any of a variety of computing devices or servers. [0025] The user device 106, social media interface 108, and one or more user community devices 110A-110N may be embodied by any computing devices known in the art. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, Claim 19 is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application) Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. The claim further defines the abstract idea and hence is abstract for the reasons presented above. The claim does not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claim does not provide significantly more) Dependent Claims DO NOT recite additional element and merely narrow the abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the recited additional elements of Claim 20: (none found: does not include additional elements and merely narrows the abstract idea) Any alleged additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components and/or electronic processes. For example, the Applicant’s Specification reads: [0018] The term “computing device” refers to any one or all …. computers, desktop computers, personal data assistants (PDAs), laptop computers, tablet computers...personal computers, smartphones, wearable devices...and similar electronic devices equipped with at least a processor and any other physical components necessarily to perform the various operations described herein. Devices such as smartphones, laptop computers, tablet computers, and wearable devices are generally collectively referred to as mobile devices. [0023] Example embodiments described herein may be implemented using any of a variety of computing devices or servers. [0025] The user device 106, social media interface 108, and one or more user community devices 110A-110N may be embodied by any computing devices known in the art. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additional claimed elements are not integrated into a practical application) Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The additional elements merely add instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, these additional elements, do not change the outcome of the analysis, when considered separately and as an ordered combination. Dependent claims further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for the reasons presented above. The dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Thus, the dependent claims are not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more) 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 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-7, 10-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lane ("SYSTEM, METHOD, AND APPARATUS FOR OPERATING A WEALTH MANAGEMENT PLATFORM", U.S. Publication Number: 20230351515 A1), in view of Ladds (“GENERATING RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAXIMIZE LOYALTY EARNINGS”, U.S. Publication Number: US 20190197575 A1). Regarding Claim 1, Lane teaches, A method for modifying a savings plan based on user data, the method comprising: receiving, by communications hardware, personalized data related to a user, (Lane [0337] financial goal setting (e.g., when users set specific, measurable financial goals, such as saving for retirement, buying a house, or funding a child's education) Lane [0136] may be event driven (e.g., updated based on later user behavior, removed or adjusted when an event causing the initial adjustment is no longer relevant, etc.). Lane [0140] the data store 116 may include any other information... performance data, data utilized for any analysis ...user preference information, and/or data utilized by a machine learning, artificial intelligence, and/or iterative improvement component herein. Lane [0349] activity data may be collected from a plurality of internal and/or external data sources and may include user actions.) anonymized data related to a group of users, (Lane [0189] with certain information redacted, made anonymous Lane [0193] some information may be anonymized ...where anonymizing operations may be insufficient, and accordingly the information may not be displayed... (e.g., the information may be withheld until a sufficient number of users are in the system for sufficient anonymization). Lane [0228] may be stored anonymously Lane [0194] group details ...(e.g., an authorized party to sign for the group), notify group members) and a savings plan related to the user; (Lane [0200] which may be utilized for forecasting... resource planning Lane [0321] retirement planning Lane [0128] a wealth planning platform... wealth planning context) providing, by plan circuitry, the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan (Lane [0218] may be performed by, and/or may embody at least in part, any controllers, circuits Lane [0337] associated with an activity such as registration and onboarding (e.g., creating an account on the platform, and providing their personal and financial information)...account aggregation (e.g., aggregating data from various financial accounts, such as bank accounts, investments, retirement accounts, and loans), financial goal setting (e.g., when users set specific, measurable financial goals, such as saving for retirement, buying a house, or funding a child's education), risk assessment (e.g., evaluating tolerance based on factors like age, investment horizon, and financial objectives), financial plan creation, Lane [0189] with certain information redacted, made anonymous) to a generative artificial intelligence (GAI) model; (Lane [0363] using generative artificial intelligence models) generating, by the plan circuitry and using the GAI model, a plan update recommendation based on the personalized data, the anonymized data, and the savings plan; (Lane [0218] may be performed by, and/or may embody at least in part, any controllers, circuits Lane [0363] using generative artificial intelligence models Lane [0337] associated with an activity such as registration and onboarding (e.g., creating an account on the platform, and providing their personal and financial information)...account aggregation (e.g., aggregating data from various financial accounts, such as bank accounts, investments, retirement accounts, and loans), financial goal setting (e.g., when users set specific, measurable financial goals, such as saving for retirement, buying a house, or funding a child's education), risk assessment (e.g., evaluating tolerance based on factors like age, investment horizon, and financial objectives), financial plan creation, Lane [0189] with certain information redacted, made anonymous) generating, by scenario circuitry, a counterfactual scenario based on the savings plan and the plan update recommendation, wherein the counterfactual scenario comprises a set of outcome changes based on applying the plan update recommendation to the savings plan and further based on behavior of the user from the personalized data; (Lane [0363] a simulation that indicated that investments are resilient to interest rate fluctuations may be modified ...to modify an illustration with cheerful colors, images...a simulation that indicated that investments are vulnerable to interest rate fluctuations may be modified to ... portray a negative outcome Lane [0135] may be utilized to apply defaults, to limit certain selections, to make certain recommendations, or a combination of these. Lane [0136] may be event driven (e.g., updated based on later user behavior, removed or adjusted when an event causing the initial adjustment is no longer relevant, etc.). Lane [0337] financial goal setting (e.g., when users set specific, measurable financial goals, such as saving for retirement, buying a house, or funding a child's education), risk assessment (e.g., evaluating tolerance based on factors like age, investment horizon, and financial objectives), financial plan creation) presenting, by the communications hardware, the plan update recommendation and the counterfactual scenario to the user; (Lane [0136] may be event driven (e.g., updated based on later user behavior, removed or adjusted when an event causing the initial adjustment is no longer relevant, etc.). The example user interface circuit 106 utilizes user communications 110 to interact with the user, whether receiving user inputs or sending notifications, messages, updating the display of the user interface, or the like. Lane [0272] provides at least one tranche organization recommendation (e.g., as a user communication 110) to at least one user of the online platform [0322] An example client support communication 24310 includes an action recommendation 24404 determined in response to the client … for example recommending an action to preserve financial goals, and/or to adjust financial goals, in response to the client event value …. example client support communication 24310 includes a document ) receiving, by the communications hardware and from the user, an indication of a response to the plan update recommendation; and in an instance in which the user accepts the plan update recommendation, updating, by the plan circuitry, the savings plan according to the plan update recommendation (Lane [0239] an offer acceptance interface 20308 (e.g., allowing a client user to accept and/or re-configure an offer, to adjust goals or priorities reflected in the offer Lane [0188] information gathering activity, followed by application activity (e.g., for a wealth planning product), followed by offer completion activity, followed by offer acceptance activity (e.g., enrollment). Lane [0136] may be event driven (e.g., updated based on later user behavior, removed or adjusted when an event causing the initial adjustment is no longer relevant, etc.).) to produce an updated savings plan; receiving, by the communications hardware, transaction data related to the updated savings plan; (Lane [0322] An example client support communication 24310 includes an action recommendation 24404 determined in response to a target financial goal compared to an achieved financial goal (e.g., recommending an action to be taken in response to a performance gap and/or over-performance of the wealth management plan)....and/or to adjust financial goals.... client engagement circuit 24304 interprets the client event value 24312 in response to a document request from the client user...and/or based on querying further information) of the updated savings plan, causing, by the plan circuitry, execution of the goal transaction involving the user and based on the updated savings plan. (Lane [0322] to adjust financial goals.... client engagement circuit 24304 interprets the client event value 24312 in response to a document request from the client user...and/or based on querying further information Lane [0128] for improved execution of a wealth management platform) Lane does not teach wherein the plan update recommendation comprises a goal transaction that is made available upon executing a set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions, wherein the set of pre-condition transactions includes at least one of a purchase or a deposit; the set of pre- determined pre-condition transactions; comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions; and in an instance in which comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre- condition transactions indicates that the transaction data satisfies conditions Ladds teaches, wherein the plan update recommendation comprises a goal transaction that is made available upon executing a set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions, wherein the set of pre-condition transactions includes at least one of a purchase or a deposit; (Ladds [0040] Recommendations 235 generated by the recommendation generator 234 may be based on analysis of past transactions and identifying purchasing behavior where more loyalty points could have been earned had the user made different purchasing decisions. ...shows a coffee shop recommendation that provides an alternative coffee shop ... indicates that the user missed out on loyalty points and would have earned 50% more loyalty points for purchases at the recommended coffee shop instead of the coffee shop the user visited. Ladds [0049] may use recommendations .... to provide further goal completion prediction information. ... may provide a number of recommended purchases... (e.g., “You'll complete your goal if you visit coffee shop A five more times!”, or “6 more months of your typical spending on Hotel B stays and your goal will be complete!”, etc.).) the set of pre- determined pre-condition transactions (Ladds [0040] Recommendations 235 generated by the recommendation generator 234 may be based on analysis of past transactions and identifying purchasing behavior where more loyalty points could have been earned had the user made different purchasing decisions. ...shows a coffee shop recommendation that provides an alternative coffee shop ... indicates that the user missed out on loyalty points and would have earned 50% more loyalty points for purchases at the recommended coffee shop instead of the coffee shop the user visited. Ladds [0049] may use recommendations .... to provide further goal completion prediction information. ... may provide a number of recommended purchases... (e.g., “You'll complete your goal if you visit coffee shop A five more times!”, or “6 more months of your typical spending on Hotel B stays and your goal will be complete!”, etc.).) comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre-condition transactions; and in an instance in which comparing the transaction data to the set of pre-determined pre- condition transactions indicates that the transaction data satisfies conditions (Ladds [0040] may be based on analysis of past transactions and identifying purchasing behavior where more loyalty points could have been earned had the user made different purchasing decisions. ...a coffee shop recommendation that provides an alternative coffee shop to one that the user has already visited. The recommendation indicates that the user missed out on loyalty points and would have earned 50% more loyalty points for purchases at the recommended coffee shop instead of the coffee shop the user visited. Based on the recommendation, the user may decide to visit the recommended coffee shop next time.) It is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the savings plan generation of Lane to incorporate the pre-determined pre-condition transactions of Ladds to “Recommendations 235 generated by the recommendation generator.” (Ladds [0040]). The modification would have been obvious, because it is merely applying a known technique (i.e. pre-determined pre-condition transactions) to a known concept (i.e. savings plan generation) ready for improvement to yield predictable result (i.e. “may provide a number of recommended purchases” Ladds [0049]) Regarding Claim 2, Lane and Ladds teach the savings plan generation of Claim 1 as described earlier. Lane teaches, wherein receiving the savings plan comprises: generating, by the plan circuitry, a recommended savings plan based on the personalized data; (Lane [0337] financial goal setting (e.g., when users set specific, measurable financial goals, such as saving for retirement, buying a house, or funding a child's education) Lane [0140] the data store 116 may include any other information... performance data, data utilized for any analysis ...user preference information, and/or data utilized by a machine learning, artificial intelligence, and/or iterative improvement component herein. Lane [0349] activity data may be collected from a plurality of internal and/or external data sources and may include user actions.) presenting, by the communications hardware, the recommended savings plan to the user; and (Lane [0136] may be event driven (e.g., updated based on later user behavior, removed or adjusted when an event causing the initial adjustment is no longer relevant, etc.). The example user interface circuit 106 utilizes user communications 110 to interact with the user, whether receiving user inputs or sending notifications, messages, updating the display of the user interface, or the like. Lane [0272] provides at least one tranche organization recommendation (e.g., as a user communication 110) to at least one user of the online platform [0322] An example client support communication 24310 includes an action recommendation 24404 determined in response to the client … for example recommending an action to preserve financial goals, and/or to adjust financial goals, in response to the client event value …. example client support communication 24310 includes a document ) receiving, by the communications hardware, an indication of a response to the recommended savings plan. (Lane [0136] may be subject to approval by a second user. Lane [0239] an offer acceptance interface 20308 (e.g., allowing a client user to accept and/or re-configure an offer, to adjust goals or priorities reflected in the offer Lane [0188] information gathering activity, followed by application activity (e.g., for a wealth planning product), followed by offer completion activity, followed by offer acceptance activity (e.g., enrollment).) Regarding Claim 3, Lane and Ladds teach the savings plan generation of Claim 1 as described earlier. Lane teaches, wherein the counterfactual scenario further comprises a health impact for the user. (Lane [0217] creating an illustration using live data,...financial performance for investment products, and/or users-specific data (e.g., age, gender, ratings such as health and credit ratings) Lane [0219] depicts the age, gender, health, and basic information such as an indication of tobacco use. Lane [0329] in response to a health estimate and/or a mortality estimate for the at least one identified user. In certain embodiments, the health estimate and/or mortality estimate is determined) Regarding Claim 4, Lane and Ladds teach the savings plan generation of Claim 1 as described earlier. Lane teaches, wherein the counterfactual scenario further comprises an analysis of time requirements for the user. (Lane [0160] according to certain time frames (e.g., certain interfaces may be displayed or available at selected times, such as five (5) years after enrollment, ten (10) years before retirement Lane [0156] for another group that the user is a member of such as “users retiring between 2040-2044 Lane [0157] a modified user interface relative to a broader user class (e.g., a client class may be the broader class, and a “client retiring after 2030” class …) ) Regarding Claim 5, Lane and Ladds teach the savings plan generation of Claim 1 as described earlier. Lane teaches, wherein the savings plan is further related to a user community comprising the user. (Lane [0337] financial goal setting (e.g., when user
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 29, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §103
Jun 27, 2025
Interview Requested
Jul 07, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 07, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 17, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §101, §103
Oct 24, 2025
Interview Requested
Nov 06, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 06, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12387266
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRIORITIZING TRANSMISSION OF TRADING DATA OVER A BANDWITDH-CONSTRAINED COMMUNICATION LINK
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 12, 2025
Patent null
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SOCIAL NETWORK ROUTING FOR REQUEST MATCHING IN ENTERPRISE ENVIRONMENTS
Granted
Patent null
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR COMBINING DIFFERENT KINDS OF WALLETS ON A MOBILE DEVICE
Granted
Patent null
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR COMMERCE ON SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
Granted
Patent null
AUTOMATIC CHARGEBACK MANAGEMENT
Granted
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
1%
Grant Probability
3%
With Interview (+1.7%)
4y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 195 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month