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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s “Amendment” filed on 03/05/2026 has been considered.
Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11-15, and 17-20 are amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending in this application and an action on the merits follow.
Applicant’s response by virtue of amendment to claims has not overcome the Examiner’s rejection under 35 USC § 101.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 USC 101. The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because claims 1, 8, and 14 are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20 fail to remedy these deficiencies.
The claims 1, 8, and 14 recite receiving a plurality of requests, determining a first enterprise tenant and a second enterprise tenant, querying a travel planning application to provide a first planned trip record and a second planned trip records, receiving the first and second planned trip records, storing the first and second planned trip records, determining first and second event data from the first and second planned trip records, storing the first and second event data, creating a first and a second expense records, storing the first and a second expense records, identifying a plurality of digitally stored per diem reimbursement rule that are specific to the first and second tenants, automatically determining one or more first and second daily allowed expense items based on the plurality of digitally stored first and second per diem reimbursement rules, and automatically updating and indicating the one or more first and second daily allowed expense items in the first and second expense records.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 recite receiving, determining tenants, storing the first and second planned trip records, determining the first and second event data, storing the first and second event data, creating expense records, storing the expense records, identifying, determining, and indicating steps as drafted, are processes that under broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind and managing commercial interactions and personal behavior, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “one or more processors; one or more non-transitory computer-readable media coupled to the one or more processors and storing one or more sequences of stored program instructions which when executed using the one or more processors cause the one or more processors to execute: using an expense reporting application and a multi-tenant distributed computing system comprising the user computers and a plurality of servers, one or more data communication networks, a first user computer, a second user computer, a first secure storage, and a second secure storage”, nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed in the human mind and by organizing human activity. For example, but for the “one or more processors, one or more non-transitory computer-readable media, a multi-tenant distributed computing system, comprising the user computers and a plurality of servers, one or more data communication networks, a first user computer, a second user computer, a first secure storage, and a second secure storage” in the context of these claims encompasses a person manually receives requests, determines tenants, stores the first and second planned trip records, determines a first and second event data from the first and second planned trip records, creates a first and second expense records, stores the first and second planned trip records/event data/expense data, identifies a plurality of first and second digitally stored per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the first and second tenants, automatically determines one or more first and second daily allowed expense items based on the first and second per diem reimbursement rules, and updates the first and second expense records to indicate the first and second allowed expense items in the first and second expense records. The ability of a graphical user interface to receive selections and output data is generic. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind and covers performance of the limitation by managing commercial interactions and personal behavior but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” and “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because querying and receiving steps are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means of retrieving data) and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” the concept of receiving, determining, querying, determining, storing, identifying, creating, updating, and indicating in a computer environment. The claimed computer components such as the one or more processors, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media, the multi-tenant distributed computing system, the user computers, the plurality of servers, the one or more data communication networks, the first user computer, the second user computer, the first secure storage, and the second secure storage are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools to perform receiving, determining, querying, determining, storing, identifying, creating, updating, and indicating steps. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims 1, 8, and 14 are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims 1, 8, and 14 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using the one or more processors, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media, the multi-tenant distributed computing system, he user computers, the plurality of servers, the one or more data communication networks, the first user computer, the second user computer, the first secure storage, and the second secure storage to perform receiving, determining, querying, determining, storing, identifying, creating, updating, and indicating steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claims do not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea (Step 2B: NO). The claims 1, 8, and 14 are not patent eligible.
Claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20, disclose insignificant helpful content to further describe content, such as a request to add details, a review and update indicator, the details of the plurality of digitally stored per diem reimbursement rules, launch the application to determine the one or more daily allowed expense item based on the user rule value, the one or more trip event groups can be classified based on different factors, and the one or more prompt indicators, which are merely descriptive content to further limit the abstract idea but not make it less abstract. Thus, the claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20 are directed to an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because descriptive content in claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20 further limit the abstract idea but not make it less abstract. Thus, the claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20 are directed to an abstract idea.
There are no additional claim element limitations recited in the claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20. Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea (Step 2B: NO). The claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20 are not patent eligible.
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.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over China Patent No. CN 1393805 to Zheng et al., in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0127240 to Abraham et al., and further in view of International Patent Application Publication No. WO 2013/048791 to Cottingham et al.
With regard to claims 1, 8, and 14, Zheng discloses a computer system, comprising:
one or more processors (fig. 1, the reimbursement system 1);
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media coupled to the one or more processors and storing one or more sequences of stored program instructions which when executed using the one or more processors cause the one or more processors to execute (fig. 1, the reimbursement system 1 additionally has a plurality of control modules 13):
using an expense reporting application, receiving a plurality of requests from a plurality of user computers, the expense reporting application being a first application of a plurality of federated applications hosted using a multi-tenant distributed computing system comprising the user computers and a plurality of servers, wherein each of the user computers and servers is coupled to the expense reporting application via one or more data communication networks, wherein the requests comprise at least a first request from a first user computer and a second request from a second user computer, and wherein the multi-tenant distributed computing system comprises computing resources provisioned for a plurality of enterprise tenants (Fig. 1, page 2, line 46-page 3, lines 4, page 7, 29-40, the invention system structure diagram shown in FIG. 1, the system is to set the travel expense reimbursement system 1 business entity computer network server as the centre. Staff 3 through a terminal 31 (such as a personal computer) via the enterprise entity internal network (intranet) 32, or WAP phone, PDA (personal digital assistant) and other internet device logs in the website of the enterprise entity, and the reimbursement system of the enterprise entity network server 1 is connected. the travel expense reimbursement program, can use its office personal computer 31 and internal network 32 connected to the reimbursement system 1. accounting system 4 with the reimbursement system 1 is connected via an internal network 41, to the collar for the travel expense request by employees. In definition, a multi-tenant computing system on mobile phones means a single app instance serves many clients (tenants) with shared infrastructure but isolated data. Examiner notes that terminals 31 can be considered as “the user computers includes a first user computer and a second computer”. Examiner notes that business entity computer network servers as the Centre servers is considered as “a plurality of servers“. Therefore, Examiner notes that the travel expense reimbursement system 1 …using the reimbursement program via the internet is considered as “a multi-tenant distributed computing system… coupled to the expense reporting application via one or more data communication networks”);
using the expense reporting application, determining a first enterprise tenant associated with the first user computer and a second enterprise tenant associated with the second user computer within the multi-tenant distributed computing system (Fig. 1, page 2, line 46-page 3, 29-40, staff 3 through a terminal 31 (such as a personal computer) via the enterprise entity internal network (intranet) 32, or WAP phone, PDA (personal digital assistant) and other internet device logs in the website of the enterprise entity, and the reimbursement system of the enterprise entity network server 1 is connected. employee by personal computer 31 browser and keyboard or other input device, input a staff identification and corresponding password to which it belongs. In fig 1, it shows multiple staffs (i.e., a first and second enterprise tenants) can be identified/determined by using different terminals (i.e., a first and second user computers) to log in the system);
using the expense reporting application, querying a travel planning application to provide a first planned trip record and a second planned trip record, receiving the first planned trip record and the second planned trip records in response the travel planning application being a second application among the plurality of federated applications (Fig. 1-3, page 3, lines 36-40, the system 1 according to the employee identification from the swiping card record database 11 searching and extracting the corresponding credit card identification code belonging to all the card data, and according to the specific number of the representing each travel and each collection is a card data file, as shown in FIG. 2 step 76. the format is exemplified in FIG. 3, and further comprises a start date after the travel number every time, end date, location, credit amount and other data. In fig 3, it shows a plurality of planned trip records can be retrieved);
using the expense reporting application, determining from the first planned trip record, first event data comprising a plurality of first schedule values for each first distinct location among a plurality of first distinct locations (Fig. 1, page 3, lines 36-40, the format is exemplified in FIG. 3, and further comprises a start date after the travel number every time, end date, location, credit amount and other data. In fig 3, the first event data (i.e., New York trip location) is determined);
using the expense reporting application, determining from the second planned trip record, second event data comprising a plurality of second schedule values for each second distinct location among a plurality of second distinct locations (Fig. 1, page 3, lines 36-40, In fig 3, the second event data (i.e., San Francisco trip location) is determined);
using the expense reporting application, creating a first expense record having one or more first travel segments based on the first event data and associated with the plurality of first distinct locations and a second expense record having one or more second travel segments based on the second event data and associated with the plurality of second distinct locations (Claim 1, Fig. 3-4, page 3, lines 41-43, When the employee 3 according to FIG. 2 step 77 point of travel selected graph number 3, and each travel enter card-reading data shown in FIG. 4, in fig. 4, the reimbursement system according to the employee identification code from the card searching the business during the corresponding records in the database, all credit card identification code corresponding to the employee identification code corresponding to the card data, to form a card data file. wherein each card data file corresponding to one period business trip. Examiner notes that the plurality of expense card data are aggregated for different travel events and segments associated with different trip locations);
using the expense reporting application, based on the plurality of digitally stored first per diem reimbursement rules, determining one or more first daily allowed expense items for each first travel segment of the one or more first travel segments (Fig. 4, page 3, lines 47-page 4, line 1, if the card data is private use employee 3 (shown in FIG. 4. following the example of purchasing book), then click the " delete " function item deleted from the reimbursement);
using the expense reporting application, based on the plurality of digitally stored second per diem reimbursement rules, determining one or more second daily allowed expense items for each second travel segment of the one or more second travel segments (Fig. 4, page 3, lines 47-page 4, line 1, if the card data is private use employee 3 (shown in FIG. 4. following the example of purchasing book), then click the " delete " function item deleted from the reimbursement); and
using the expense reporting application, automatically updating the first expense record in the first secure storage to indicate the one or more first daily allowed expense items as first expense line items in the first expense record and the second expense record in the second secure storage to indicate the one or more second daily allowed expense items as second expense line items in the second expense record (claim 1, Fig. 2, fig. 4-5, page 4, lines 7-13, Once the staff 3 in FIG. 4 each time the travel card editing data item, the reimbursement system 1 going to the data to date is, fare, , etc. are row are gathered, to display in FIG. 5. the editing card data file stored in the swiping card record database 11, as shown in FIG. 2 step 79. The staff edits the card data file and the edited file storing the card data to the card record database).
Zheng discloses manually determining one or more daily allowed expense items, However, Zheng dees not disclose automatically determining one or more first and second daily allowed expense items; using an expense reporting application, querying a travel planning application to provide planned trip records comprising transmitting a programmatic call to an API associated with the travel planning application to request the travel planning application to determine trip segments from trip details, and storing the first planned trip record in a first secure storage for the first tenant and storing the second planned trip record in a second secure storage for the second tenant in the multi-tenant distributed computing system, wherein the first secure storage and the second secure storage are separate; using the expense reporting application, storing the first event data in the first secure storage and the second event data in the second secure storage; using the expense reporting application, storing the first expense record in the first secure storage and the second expense record in the second secure storage; using the expense reporting application, identifying a plurality of digitally stored first per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the first enterprise tenant and a plurality of digitally stored second per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the second enterprise tenant.
However, Abraham teaches automatically determining one or more first and second daily allowed expense items (For example, an expense policy 132 may define one or more expense categories that are used to categorize reimbursable expenses (e.g., meals, transportation, incidentals, equipment, etc.). As another example, an expense policy 132 may define an expense limit that is applicable to one or more employees and/or one or more expense categories for a particular unit of time (e.g., day, week, month, year, etc.). As another example, an expense policy 132 may define an expense amount that is considered reasonable and/or an expense amount that is considered unreasonable (e.g., based on expense type, vendor, employee, group of employees, location of expense, date of expense, time of expense, etc.) As another example, an expense policy 132 may identify one or more kinds of expenses and/or establishments (e.g., particular stores or restaurants) for which expenses are not reimbursable (e.g., non-business charges, unreasonably high expense amounts, etc.). , paragraph 61); using an expense reporting application, querying a travel planning application to provide planned trip records comprising transmitting a programmatic call to an API associated with the travel planning application to request the travel planning application to determine trip segments from trip details (Some examples of an external data source 146 supplying data to an expense reporting service 112 include, but are not limited to: an airline or travel agency supplying data associated with an itinerary and/or ticket purchase. an expense reporting service 112 is configured to retrieve data from an external data source 146 by ‘pulling’ the data via an application programming interface (API) of the external data source 146, using user credentials 144 that a user has provided for that particular external data source 146. Alternatively or additionally, an external data source 146 may be configured to ‘push’ data to the expense reporting service 112 via an API of the expense reporting service, using an access key, password, and/or other kind of credential that a user has supplied to the external data source 146. paragraphs 94-95); and using the expense reporting application, identifying a plurality of digitally stored first per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the first enterprise tenant and a plurality of digitally stored second per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the second enterprise tenant (As another example, an expense policy 132 may define an expense limit that is applicable to one or more employees and/or one or more expense categories for a particular unit of time (e.g., day, week, month, year, etc.). For example, if an employee's corporate card is authorized for a taxi to an airport (e.g., as determined by the transaction authorization data processing engine 117 evaluating a transaction authorization data stream received from the card issuer 107 via the card issuer interface 106), an expense trigger 138 may identify (e.g., based on an expense pattern 137 for business travel), a corresponding expense for return travel from the airport. As another example, if an employee's corporate card is authorized for airfare to a travel destination and a hotel stay at the travel destination, an expense trigger 138 may identify corresponding expenses for local travel to and from both home airport and destination airport. Based on the association between the transaction and the employee's targeted activity, the expense trigger 138 may identify the transaction as a potentially eligible business expense (e.g., if made using the employee's corporate card) or reimbursable expense (e.g., if made using the employee's personal card). Examiner notes that an expense limit that is applicable to one or more employees, which is considered as “a plurality of digitally stored first and second per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the first and second enterprise tenant”, paragraphs 61, 69, and 72).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zheng to include, automatically determining one or more first and second daily allowed expense items; using an expense reporting application, querying a travel planning application to provide planned trip records comprising transmitting a programmatic call to an API associated with the travel planning application to request the travel planning application to determine trip segments from trip details; and using the expense reporting application, identifying a plurality of digitally stored first per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the first enterprise tenant and a plurality of digitally stored second per diem reimbursement rules that are specific to the second enterprise tenant, as taught in Abraham, in order to automate various aspects of expense reporting (Abraham, paragraph 2).
However, Cottinghan teaches storing the first planned trip record in a first secure storage for the first tenant and storing the second planned trip record in a second secure storage for the second tenant in the multi-tenant distributed computing system, wherein the first secure storage and the second secure storage are separate (the user may save the expense entry into the local database on the mobile device. a calendar icon 1 108 in a Springboard 1100 may be used by a user to initiate calendar entry mode. This brings the user to a calendar interface 1704, from which the user can select an event (e.g., calendar entry 1702). It is noted that the underlying calendar application may be located on either the mobile device or the server. Upon selection of the calendar entry 1702, the mobile application will automatically create an expense item 1706. Examiner notes that the local databases on the mobile devices operating by different users can be considered as “a first and second secure storage for the first and second tenants in the multi-tenant distributed computing system, wherein the first secure storage and the second secure storage are separate”, Fig. 2-3, fig 17, and fig. 23, paragraphs 76,118, and 143); using the expense reporting application, storing the first event data in the first secure storage and the second event data in the second secure storage (At 1211, the new entry may be saved into local storage at the mobile device. segments can be created for the different trips that were made by the user over the course of the day. These segments can be identified based on information such as start location, start time, arrival location, arrival time, and/or mileage/distance travelled. Examiners notes the new entry may be saved into different local storages at the mobile devices operated by different user, which is considered as “storing the first event data in the first secure storage and the second event data in the second secure storage”. Fig. 2-3, fig 17, and fig. 23, paragraphs 76,100, 118, and 143); using the expense reporting application, storing the first expense record in the first secure storage and the second expense record in the second secure storage (the user may save the expense entry into the local databases on the mobile devices operated by different users. Fig. 2-3, paragraph 76).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zheng to include, storing the first planned trip record in a first secure storage for the first tenant and storing the second planned trip record in a second secure storage for the second tenant in the multi-tenant distributed computing system, wherein the first secure storage and the second secure storage are separate; using the expense reporting application, storing the first event data in the first secure storage and the second event data in the second secure storage; using the expense reporting application, storing the first expense record in the first secure storage and the second expense record in the second secure storage, as taught in Cottinghan, in order to implement expense entry for mobile expense solutions (Cottinghan, paragraph 6).
With regard to claims 2, 9, and 15, Zheng discloses using the expense reporting application, executing steps of claim 1 in response to receiving a first input specifying a first request to add details of the first planned trip record that has been previously created in the travel planning application and a second input specifying a second request to add details of the second planned trip record that has been previously created in the travel planning application (page, 4, lines 5-6, Fig. 4, selecting "new" function of the most right and added expense item.).
With regard to claims 3, 10, and 16, Zheng discloses using the expense reporting application, executing steps of claim 1 as part of a per diem modal function that is implemented as a programmatic function; and generating and transmitting, to a user computer, sequences of presentation instructions which, when executed using the user computer, cause displaying a prompt to review and update an imported trip itinerary (page 4, lines 14-17, then, the reimbursement system 1 the control module 13 will inform the employee 3 of specific main pipe through the internal network 32, prompting that logged into the system 1, browsing, viewing and storing the employee 3 editing the card data file, after affirmation file further stores the card data such as the swiping card record database 11, as shown in FIG. 2).
With regard to claims 4 and 17, the combination of references discloses the plurality of digitally stored first or second per diem reimbursement rules specify a plurality of per diem categories, each of the plurality of per diem categories comprising a user role value, an eligibility value, one or more per diem items, and one or more per diem limit values corresponding to each of the one or more per diem items (Abraham, paragraph 61).
With regard to claims 5, 11, and 18, Zheng discloses receiving, from a user account, a request to launch the expense reporting application (page 4, lines 14-17), however, Zheng does not disclose using the expense reporting application, based on the plurality of digitally stored first or second per diem reimbursement rules, matching the user account to a particular user role value, and automatically determining the one or more first or second daily allowed expense items for each travel segment of the one or more first or second travel segments only when the eligibility value associated with the particular user role value indicates eligibility.
However, Abraham teaches using the expense reporting application, based on the plurality of digitally stored first or second per diem reimbursement rules, matching the user account to a particular user role value, and automatically determining the one or more first or second daily allowed expense items for each travel segment of the one or more first or second travel segments only when the eligibility value associated with the particular user role value indicates eligibility (a user's personal expense history, an user's department's and/or employer's current budget constraints, etc. expense triggers may differ depending on employee attributes, such as employee title, clearance level, job responsibilities. Additionally or alternatively, expense triggers may vary between different groups of employees, such as between different companies or organizational departments within the same company., paragraphs 37, 61, and 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zheng to include, using the expense reporting application, based on the plurality of digitally stored first or second per diem reimbursement rules, matching the user account to a particular user role value, and automatically determining the one or more first or second daily allowed expense items for each travel segment of the one or more first or second travel segments only when the eligibility value associated with the particular user role value indicates eligibility, as taught in Abraham, in order to automate various aspects of expense reporting (Abraham, paragraph 2).
With regard to claims 6, 12, and 19, Zheng discloses further comprising digitally storing in one or more trip event groups, the first or second event data comprising the plurality of first or second schedule values for each first or second distinct location among the plurality of first or second distinct locations, wherein the one or more trip event groups of the first or second event data are classified based on any of: any missing information determined from the first or second planned trip record and the first or second event data associated with the plurality of first or second distinct locations, and the review and the update of the imported trip itinerary (Fig. 3, page 3, lines 38-40, according to the specific number of the representing each travel and each collection is a card data file, as shown in FIG. 2 step 76. the format is exemplified in FIG. 3, and further comprises a start date after the travel number every time, end date, location, credit amount and other data.).
With regard to claims 7, 13, and 20, Zheng discloses further comprising indicating the prompt to review and update the imported trip itinerary and the first or second event data with at least one of one or more prompt indicators (page 4, lines 14-17, the reimbursement system 1 the control module 13 will inform the employee 3 of specific main pipe through the internal network 32, prompting that logged into the system 1, browsing, viewing and storing the employee 3 editing the card data file).
Response to Arguments
Applicants' arguments filed on 03/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive especially in light of the previously references used in the rejections.
Applicants remark that “the combination of references does not disclose using a multi-tenant distributed computing system comprising the user computers and a plurality of servers, wherein each of the user computers and servers is coupled to the expense reporting application via one or more data communication networks, wherein the requests comprise at least a first request from a first user computer and a second request from a second user computer, and wherein the multi-tenant distributed computing system comprises computing resources provisioned for a plurality of enterprise tenants; using the expense reporting application, determining a first enterprise tenant associated with the first user computer and a second enterprise tenant associated with the second user computer within the multi-tenant distributed computing system; using the expense reporting application, determining from the second planned trip record, second event data comprising a plurality of second schedule values for each second distinct location among a plurality of second distinct locations; and using the expense reporting application, based on the plurality of digitally stored second per diem reimbursement rules, automatically determining one or more second daily allowed expense items for each second travel segment of the one or more second travel segments”.
Examiner directs Applicants' attention to the office action above.
Applicants remark that “At least these recitations demonstrate how the claimed method offers a technical improvement over prior systems. The method utilizes an automatic, multi-tenant, federated computing system to process large numbers of requests from user computers in parallel, thereby improving latency and enhancing system resilience under heavy workloads. The claim language and the Specification therefore reflect an improvement of the expense system by increasing operational efficiency via end-to-end automation, enhancing system security via tenant-level data isolation and security at scale, and improving system throughput and responsiveness by handling concurrent user requests and distributing work across federated applications. As in Ex Parte Desjardins, the present claims are "directed to" an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field. For the reasons above, the claims are eligible. Accordingly, withdrawal of the § 101 rejection of claims 1, 8, and 14 is respectfully requested.”
Examiner does not agree. The claim limitation does not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. Nor does it effects an improvement in any other technology or technical field. They do not describe any particular improvement in the manner a computer functions. Instead, the claim amounts to nothing significantly more than using the expense reporting application on a computer to receive and store travel planning events, create expense record, and determine and update the expense record based on the stored per diem reimbursement rules. Under our precedents, that is not enough to transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention.
As we determine herein, the claims 1, 8, and 22-24 are directed to achieving the result of managing a loan contract to minimize risk by utilizing integrity scores generated from the machine learning model, as distinguished from a technological improvement for achieving or applying that result. Although a machine learning model is used, such use is both generic and conventional. The object of the claims is to minimize risk for loan transactions, not to produce technology enabling a machine learning model to operate. The claims call for generic use of such a model in the manner such models conventionally operate. Simply reciting a particular technological module or piece of equipment in a claim does not confer eligibility.
There is no unconventional technology claimed, any technological improvements or new technology involved on Applicant’s invention. The computers are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g to receive, store, transmit, modify or generate data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer to an abstract idea (e.g a fundamental economic practice and/or mental process) does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer environment is not a practical application of the abstract idea and does not take the claims out of the mental process concept and method of organizing a human activity grouping.
Conclusion
Please refer to form 892 for cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARIEL J YU whose telephone number is (571)270-3312. The examiner can normally be reached 11AM - 7PM (M-F).
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, Obeid Fahd A can be reached on 571-270-3324. 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.
/ARIEL J YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights