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 .
Status of Claims
The following is Office Action on the merits in response to the communication received on 9/9/25.
Claim status:
Amended claims: 1-4, 7-13, and 15-20
Canceled claims: none
Added New claims: None
Pending claims: 1-20
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 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is not directed to statutory subject matter. Specifically, the invention of claims 1-20 is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claims 1 and 9 are directed to a method (claim 1), and a system (claim 9). Therefore on its face, claims 1 and 9 are directed to a statutory category of invention under Step 1 of the 2019 PEG. However claims 1 and 9 are also directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, under Step 2A (Prong One and Prong Two) and Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, which is a judicial exception to 35 U.S.C. 101, as detailed below. Using the language of independent claim 9 to illustrate the claim recites the limitations of, (i) assessing and tracking equity in an asset for a consumer, (ii) detect a physical location of the system; (iii) establish a connection; (iv) gather data for the consumer and storing at least some of the consumer data; (v) gather data for the asset and storing at least some of the asset data; (vi) defining a consumer cohort; (vii) analyze consumer, asset, and geographic data to analyze the gathered data, wherein the analysis includes predicting asset depreciation based on gathered data define a consumer cohort based on the analysis, wherein the consumer cohort is one of equity enabled, equity neutral, or equity depleted (viii) output a plurality of recommendations for improving the consumer cohort under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) covers methods of organizing human activity -- fundamental economic principles or practices, risk mitigation but for the recitation of generic computers and generic computer components. (Independent claim 1 recites similar limitations and the analysis is the same).
That is, other than reciting, a processor, a local storage module, an I/O interface module, a non-transitory computer-readable medium and at least one database, a GPS module, a communication interface module and an artificial intelligence module nothing in the claim precludes the steps from being directed to methods of organizing human activity -- fundamental economic principles or practices, risk mitigation. If a claim limitation under its BRI, covers methods of organizing human activity but for the recitation of generic computers, then the limitations fall within the “methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, claim 9 recites an abstract idea under Step 2A Prong One of the Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance 84 Fed.Reg 50 (“2019 PEG”).
This “methods of organizing human activity” is not integrated into a practical application under Step 2A prong Two of the 2019 PEG. In particular the claim recites the following additional elements of, a processor, a local storage module, an I/O interface module, a non-transitory computer-readable medium and at least one database, a GPS module, a communication interface module and an artificial intelligence module. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the additional elements – a processor, a local storage module, an I/O interface module, a non-transitory computer-readable medium and at least one database, a GPS module, a communication interface module and an artificial intelligence module.
The processor, local storage module, I/O interface module, non-transitory computer-readable medium and at least one database, GPS module, a communication interface module and an artificial intelligence module are recited at a high-level or generality (i.e. as a generic computer performing generic computer functions) such that, they amount to no more than instructions to apply the abstract idea with a general computer (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Under Step 2B of the 2019 PEG independent claim 9 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim(s) 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, a processor, a local storage module, an I/O interface module, a non-transitory computer-readable medium and at least one database, a GPS module, a communication interface module, and an artificial intelligence module, assessing and tracking equity in an asset for a consumer, detect a physical location of the system; establish a connection; gather data for the consumer and storing at least some of the consumer data; gather data for the asset and storing at least some of the asset data; defining a consumer cohort; analyze consumer, asset, and geographic data to analyze the gathered data, wherein the analysis includes predicting asset depreciation based on gathered data define a consumer cohort based on the analysis, wherein the consumer cohort is one of equity enabled, equity neutral, or equity depleted, output a plurality of recommendations for improving the consumer cohort, amounts to instructions to apply the abstract idea with a general computer. The claims are not patent eligible.
The dependent claims have been given the full two part analysis including analyzing the additional limitations individually. The Dependent claim(s) when analyzed individually are also held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because for the same reasoning as above and the additional recited limitation(s) fail to establish that the claim(s) are not directed to an abstract idea. The additional limitations of the dependent claim(s) when considered individually do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Claims 2-8 and 10-20 merely further explain the abstract idea.
When viewed individually the additional limitations do not amount to a claim as a whole that is significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly claims 1-20 are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The Applicant’s arguments and amendments overcome the 103 Rejections, therefore, the Rejections are moot.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/9/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Response Remarks On Claim Rejections – 35 USC 101
Nothing in the amendments precludes the steps from being directed to methods of organizing human activity -- fundamental economic principles or practices, risk mitigation but for the recitation of generic computers and generic computer components. The new limitations capture information, which is insignificant extra solution activity that is well understood routine and conventional. If a claim limitation under its BRI, covers fundamental economic principles or practices: mitigating risk, the limitations fall within the “methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The Examiner disagrees with the sentences “The claims are not directed to an abstract idea because they cannot practically be performed in the human mind and The claims are integrated into a practical application that provides significantly more than the judicial exception” (Pages 7-8). The claims do not provide an improvement over prior systems and only improve the abstract idea.
Response Remarks On Claim Rejections – 35 USC 103
The Applicant’s arguments and amendments overcome the 103 Rejections, therefore, the Rejection(s) are moot.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARLA HUDSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. ET.
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, Bennett Sigmond can be reached at (303) 297-4411. 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.
/M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3694
/BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694