Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. On 1/27/26, Applicant amended the independent claims. Applicant remarks address these features. See the new citations for the new features.
Also, on page 14 of Applicant’s 1/27/26 Remarks, Applicant states, “Johnson fails to teach or suggest the claimed account architecture in which a customer maintains both (i) a bank account ("first resource account") data record, and (ii) a separate and different loyalty points account ("second resource account") data record.”. However, the actual claim language are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the Applicant’s Spec. And, the current 1/27/26 representative claim 1 does not have a bank or financial account. And, there are no bank or financial account in any of the claims, independent or dependent, dated 1/27/26. Also, the claims do not have clear or strong language like “separate and different” account. Rather, representative claim 1 states merely “a first resource account” and a “second resource account”. And, Applicant’s Spec show plurality of accounts and a wide variety of accounts. So, the claim is presently open to interpretation as to the type of accounts of a first and second resource account. And, Johnson shows the claimed features as presently claimed.
Also, as shown below, Johnson discloses at [3] different accounts owned by the same customer and that these accounts can be integrated and connected across the accounts and include bank and financial accounts. Also, Johnson shows integrate accounts at [3], automatically transferring funds between accounts [4].
Also, Johnson shows a single customer with different accounts [3] and Johnson shows borrowing points in an account [14] and tracking whether the borrowed points are paid back via the agreed contract terms [15]. Also, [15] shows a resource account of activities the user has performed or owes and then a resource account of net points. As the user succeeds or “fails” these different owed and net totals are updated. And, [43] shows an account of the activities he must do and a different customer account “[43]…or another customer account” that will be charged and show the net points. These different accounts with reconciliation of what is owed and what the net is also shown at “[79]… If such a fee is due, the penalty to be charged to the account (or to another account of the customer) may be”. So, there is a first account of activities owed and another account where the points are given or taken away. Also, at [72] Johnson shows “after awarding points to an account” and then changing the points based on the owed points. So, the points are tracked for points earned and also net points because of points owed. Also, Johnson shows multiple different customer incentive accounts coming together in one reconciled account “[13]… different incentive types preferably all may be administered through a single integrated up-front incentives management system, with a single account statement automatically generated by the system from data received on a regular basis, generally monthly, from various financial institution accounting and customer database systems”.
On page 15, “The claim requires that the bank account data record itself includes a data field explicitly indicating a "resource deficit," i.e., a stored value representing that the bank account is associated with a shortage of loyalty points relative to some required or target amount.” However, again, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation of the actual claim language. And, Johnson shows borrowing points in an account [14] and tracking whether the borrowed points are paid back via the agreed contract terms [15]. Also see calculating additional points owed based on points already owed/deficit at [72].
Also, the 101 is still found to apply. No new additional elements beyond the generic have been added or found. The automatic features is considered generic as no technical steps are stated. See the 101 below.
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.
Independent Claims 1, 12, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims are in a statutory category of invention. However, the claims recite identifying an event initiating an analysis of a resource availability of a loyalty program; determining a resource deficit against the resource availability; generating an output comprising a resource adjustment proposal for an account associated with the event; transmitting the output; receiving an acceptance of the resource adjustment proposal; and transmitting a first instruction to increment a current resource balance of the account, modifying a data recording based on updated deficit field, performing an statement making process for the first resource account, wherein the performing includes: configuring a statement showing the balance; the first record being different from the second record; in response to detecting that an updated resource deficit of the first redeemable resource associated with the first resource account subsequent to the incrementing is non-zero, automatically interrupting, by a statement processor, the statement making process to insert a value of the updated resource deficit into the statement. This is considered in the Abstract Idea grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity - advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim is directed to an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements. The additional elements are considered at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one hardware processor interoperably coupled with the at least one memory, the resource management system, a device associated with the account, a loyalty system managing the loyalty program, automated statement generation process, automatic configuring, automatic interrupting, a data record. These are considered generic. The automatic steps are considered generic as no technical features are provided. The generically recited computer elements do not add a practical application or meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional limitations only perform well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d). Also, the additional hardware elements are: (i) mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer, and/or (ii) recitation of generic computer structure that serves to perform generic computer functions. Viewed separately or as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The claim does not provide significantly more than the identified abstract idea, in that there is no improvement to another technology or technical field, no improvement to the functioning of a computer, no application with, or by use of a particular machine, no transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, no specific limitation other than what is well-understood, routing and conventional in the field, no unconventional step that confines the claim to a particular useful application, or meaningful limitations that amount to more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 2-11, 13-19 are not considered directed to any additional non-abstract claim elements. No new additional elements beyond the generic are found in the dependent claims. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above. While these descriptive elements may provide further helpful description for the claimed invention, these elements do not confer subject matter eligibility to the invention since their individual and combined significance is still not more than the abstract concepts identified in the claimed invention. Hence, these dependent claims are also rejected under 101.
Please see the 35 USC 101 section at the Examination Guidance and Training Materials page on the USPTO website.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (20080208689) in view of Collins (20080120618).
Claims 1, 12, 20. Examiner notes Applicant Spec and that the claimed invention loans reward points to a user based on user account status and future possible reward points. Johnson discloses a resource management system comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one hardware processor interoperably coupled with the at least one memory, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one hardware processor, cause the resource management system to perform operations comprising (Fig. 6).
Based on Applicant Spec, redeemable resource is points, awards, rewards, etc., the deficit has to do with loan/borrow on points and deficit/debt of an award account (see Applicant Spec at [22]). Johnson further discloses determining a resource deficit of a first redeemable resource (for redeemable resources see points, reward and redeem at [19]; see loan and reward and points at [72, 74, 78, 79, 43]; Fig 11; also see borrow up-front points at [14]) associated with a first resource account based on analysis of a current resource balance of a second resource account containing the first redeemable resource ( see reward and points and borrow/loan at [14, 43, 72, 74, 78, 79]; see loan and points and balance and offset and net at [72, 78, 79], so the points are the resource and there is the total and the owed points for the different accounts; also see a single customer having multiple various accounts at [3]);
transmitting to a computing device associated with the first resource account (see send offer at Fig. 5, see network connected to customer at Fig. 6), a resource adjustment proposal message (see posting debits and credits at [4]; see request and response for balance and resource movement at Figs. 6, 11, 12, Figs. 15 and 16; see loan and points and balance and offset and net at [72, 78, 79]);
receiving, from the computing device, an acceptance of the resource adjustment proposal (see agree at [15], accept at [43]; see loan and points and balance and offset and net at [72, 78, 79]);
transmitting, to a computing system managing the second resource account, a request to increment a value in a resource balance data field of a second data record associated with the second resource account (see loan and points and balance and offset and net at [72, 78, 79], Fig 11; also see borrow up-front points at [14]; note request redemption which involves change in balances at [76], see request and response for balance and resource movement at Figs. 6, 11, 12, Figs. 15 and 16; Also, Johnson shows borrowing points in an account [14] and tracking whether the borrowed points are paid back via the agreed contract terms [15]. Also see calculating additional points owed based on points already owed/deficit at [72]. So, Johson shows increment and changing values in the data records; Also, Johnson shows a single customer with different accounts [3] and Johnson shows borrowing points in an account [14] and tracking whether the borrowed points are paid back via the agreed contract terms [15]. Also, [15] shows a resource account of activities the user has performed or owes and then a resource account of net points. As the user succeeds or “fails” these different owed and net totals are updated. And, [43] shows an account of the activities he must do and a different customer account “[43]…or another customer account” that will be charged and show the net points. These different accounts with reconciliation of what is owed and what the net is also shown at “[79]… If such a fee is due, the penalty to be charged to the account (or to another account of the customer) may be”. So, there is a first account of activities owed and another account where the points are given or taken away. Also, at [72] Johnson shows “after awarding points to an account” and then changing the points based on the owed points. So, the points are tracked for points earned and also net points because of points owed. Also, Johnson shows multiple different customer incentive accounts coming together in one reconciled account “[13]… different incentive types preferably all may be administered through a single integrated up-front incentives management system, with a single account statement automatically generated by the system from data received on a regular basis, generally monthly, from various financial institution accounting and customer database systems”);
causing a first data record associated with the first resource account at a first database to be modified based on updating a value in a resource data deficit field of the first data record (see loan and points and balance and offset and net at [72, 78, 79], Fig. 11), the first data record being different from the second data record (Also, Johnson shows a single customer with different accounts [3] and Johnson shows borrowing points in an account [14] and tracking whether the borrowed points are paid back via the agreed contract terms [15]. Also, [15] shows a resource account of activities the user has performed or owes and then a resource account of net points. As the user succeeds or “fails” these different owed and net totals are updated. And, [43] shows an account of the activities he must do and a different customer account “[43]…or another customer account” that will be charged and show the net points. These different accounts with reconciliation of what is owed and what the net is also shown at “[79]… If such a fee is due, the penalty to be charged to the account (or to another account of the customer) may be”. So, there is a first account of activities owed and another account where the points are given or taken away. Also, at [72] Johnson shows “after awarding points to an account” and then changing the points based on the owed points. So, the points are tracked for points earned and also net points because of points owed. Also, Johnson shows multiple different customer incentive accounts coming together in one reconciled account “[13]… different incentive types preferably all may be administered through a single integrated up-front incentives management system, with a single account statement automatically generated by the system from data received on a regular basis, generally monthly, from various financial institution accounting and customer database systems”).
Examiner notes Applicant Spec at [7, 22, 73] for the following features.
Johnson further discloses performing an automated statement generation process for the first resource account, wherein the performing includes (see automatically at [2-4] and also see rewards and “statement automatically generated” at [13]):
automatically and without user input, configuring a statement processor to generate, for the first resource account, a statement specifying the current resource balance of the second resource account (see loan and points and balance and offset and net at [72, 78, 79], see Fig. 11; also see managing accounts automatically [2] and automatically balancing between accounts [3] and maintaining records and balances and posting debits and credits and automatically issuing account statements [4] and automatic operation [4]; and also see rewards and “statement automatically generated” at [13]; and see statement processing and statement producing and reporting and balance and net and loan/borrowing and points at [78, 79]).
Examiner notes Applicant Spec at [22, 56, 73] for the following features. Johnson further discloses in response to detecting that an updated resource deficit of the first redeemable resource associated with the first resource account subsequent to incrementing is non-zero, automatically updating, by the statement processor, the automatic statement generation process to insert the value in the resource deficit data field into the generated statement ([72]; also see automatic statement, report at [13]; also see tracked net/offset of earned and borrowed and net points citations above). While Johnson discloses automatically updating, Johnson does not explicitly automatically interrupting… to insert a value of the updated resource deficit into the generated statement or interrupting batch processing to insert an update. However, Johnson discloses batch transfers and real-time network transfers [54] and also the statement, report, and record features above. And, Collins discloses batch processing and that batch processing historically did not allow updates during the batch processing [9] and that, however, a solution is provided where a batch process can be started but updates can also occur during the batch processing [14, 15, 23, 24]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Collins’ updates during batch processing to Johnson’s updating deficit and balance totals and batch processing. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better find balances and process batches.
Claim 2, 13. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: performing a redemption of at least one identified reward using a resource balance of the at least one identified reward from an incremented resource balance of the second resource account, wherein the resource balance of the second resource account is decremented by the resource balance of the at least one identified reward (see loan and reward and points at [72, 74, 78, 79, 43]; also see balance at [72, 78]; Fig 11; also see borrow up-front points at [14]).
Claim 3, 14. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 2, wherein determining the resource deficit of the first redeemable resource comprises performing a periodic account review of each account of a plurality of accounts of the resource management system (see balance and period at [15]; also see periodic basis and report at [60]; also see review at [78]).
Claim 4, 15. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 3, wherein the plurality of accounts is associated with an account period, and wherein, at an end of a close of the account period, the instructions instruct the at least one hardware processor, for each of the plurality of accounts, to: identify an amount of redeemable resources earned during a current account period for an account; increment the current resource balance of the second resource account by the identified amount of redeemable resources earned; and in response to determining that a resource deficit balance of the account is not zero, decrement the current resource balance of the second resource account to reduce a value of the resource deficit balance of the first resource account (see period and balance and calculated at [71], see review and balance and calculated and points at [78], see report at [60]).
Claim 5, 16. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 4, wherein, in response to determining that the resource deficit balance of the account is greater than the incremented current resource balance of the second resource account, decrementing the current resource balance of the second resource account to reduce the value of the resource deficit balance of the first resource account comprises: reducing the resource deficit balance of the first resource account by the incremented current resource balance of the second resource account; and reducing the incremented current resource balance of the second resource account to zero (see period and balance and calculated at [71], see review and balance and calculated and points at [78], see report at [60]).
Claim 6, 17. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 4, wherein, in response to determining that the resource deficit balance of the first resource account is less than the incremented current resource balance of the second resource account decrementing the current resource balance of the second resource account to reduce the value of the resource deficit balance of the first resource account comprises: reducing the incremented current resource balance by the resource deficit balance to a new current resource balance; and reducing the resource deficit balance of the account to zero (see period and balance and calculated at [71], see review and balance and calculated and points at [78], see report at [60]).
Claim 7, 18. Johnson does not explicitly disclose the resource management system of claim 2, wherein transmitting the resource adjustment proposal is performed in response to: determining whether a difference between the current resource balance and the resource balance of a reward associated with the reward is within a threshold range above the current resource balance of the second resource account; and in response to determining that the difference between the current resource balance and the resource balance of the reward associated with the reward is within the threshold range, determining that the resource adjustment proposal is to be provided to the account. However, Johnson discloses reward threshold levels [7] and minimum purchase amounts for related to promotions [65] a variety of points amounts related to the incentive [71] and minimize risks by identifying program characteristics [48] and initial characteristics like value of incentive offered [49] and minimum initial values for the user accounts ([claim] 4. The method of claim 1 comprising additionally: (a) extending an offer to a prospective account holder to open a prepaid financial account having at least a minimum initial value and specifying account activity conditions and a reward). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Johnson’s thresholds and minimum to Johnson’s varying promotion amounts and Johnson’s varying program characteristics. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better set program characteristics and better minimize risks.
Claim 8, 19. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 7, wherein the threshold range is adjusted based on an account history (see “[48]… minimize these risks it is important to identify the program characteristics and individuals” and see “[49]…individuals… identify those identifying characteristics (income, past account activity, etc.)”).
Claim 9. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 7, wherein transmitting the resource adjustment proposal is performed in response to: determining, from an analysis of transactions second resource with the first resource account, whether the difference between a resource balance cost of the reward associated with the reward and the current resource balance of the second resource account was earned by the first resource account during a current account period but has not yet been allocated to the current resource balance of the second resource account (see loan and reward and points at [72, 74, 78, 79, 43]; also see balance at [72, 78]; Fig 11; also see borrow up-front points at [14]).
Claim 10. Johnson further discloses the resource management system of claim 9, wherein transmitting, to the account device associated with the first resource account the resource adjustment proposal is performed in response to: in response to determining that the difference has already been earned by the first resource account, determining that the resource adjustment proposal is to be provided to the account (see verify and confirm and valid and account at [57], see confirm and validate and authorize and account at [76, 77]).
Claim 11. Johnson does not explicitly disclose the resource management system of claim 1, wherein transmitting the resource adjustment proposal to the account device associated with the first resource account is performed through a communication channel configured to provide a secure transmission of the resource adjustment proposal. However, Johnson discloses sending the offer/proposal over a network (see send offer at Fig. 5, see network connected to customer at Fig. 6) and that security is needed (see extreme security measures and secure location and ensure security at [56]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add Johnson’s security to Johnson’s communications so that secure communications can be sent. One would have been motivated to do this in order to better provide security.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Aaa) These discuss updates during batch processing: Barroso, Lin, Fuji [82], Collins [9][14, 15, 23, 24];
Aa) These describe batch processing: Cadarette [21, 23], Fujii batch processing at [82], Kidd [48];
Kern and Ortiz also disclose relevant features.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARTHUR DURAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6718. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs, 7-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ilana Spar can be reached on (571) 270-7537. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ARTHUR DURAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621 2/23/26