DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office action is in response to Applicant’s communication filed on December 29, 2025. Election of claims 1-9, without traverse, in response to Restriction/Election requirement is acknowledged. Applicants are respectfully requested to file the Power of attorney documents and also cancel the non-elected claims 10-19 in their response to this office action. Claims 1-9 have been examined. The rejections and a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter over prior art are stated below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim(s) recite(s) a method for asset valuation and optimization, which is considered a judicial exception because it falls under the category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity” such as fundamental economic practice as well as commercial or legal interactions including agreements as discussed below. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application as discussed below. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as discussed below.
Analysis
Step 1: In the instant case, exemplary claim 1 is directed to a method (process).
Step 2A – Prong One: The limitations of “A method for asset valuation and optimization, the method implemented through a set of instructions executed by a processor, the method comprising the steps of:
registering a participant;
capturing asset declarations representing assets of the participant;
disaggregating the captured asset declarations into similar asset groups based on predefined parameters associated with an asset class and a type of the participant;
classifying the similar asset groups into a plurality of thematic pools;
synthesizing actionable strategies for each of the thematic pools; and
categorizing the actionable strategies into supply and demand segments, aligning with current market needs and capability of the participant” as drafted, when considered collectively as an ordered combination without the italicized portions, is a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers the category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity” such as fundamental economic practice as well as commercial or legal interactions including agreements.
Asset valuation and optimization is a fundamental economic practice such as managing assets.
The steps of “registering a participant; capturing asset declarations representing assets of the participant; disaggregating the captured asset declarations into similar asset groups based on predefined parameters associated with an asset class and a type of the participant; classifying the similar asset groups into a plurality of thematic pools; synthesizing actionable strategies for each of the thematic pools; and categorizing the actionable strategies into supply and demand segments, aligning with current market needs and capability of the participant” considered collectively is a form of fulfilling agreements between the parties concerned. Hence, the steps of the claim, considered collectively as an ordered combination without the italicized portions, covers the abstract category of “Certain Methods of organizing human activity”.
That is, other than, a processor, nothing in the claim precludes the steps from being performed as a method of organizing human activity. If the claim limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers methods of organizing human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components, 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 Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the additional elements of a processor to perform all the steps. A plain reading of Figures 1-8 and associated descriptions in the Specification reveals that the processor comprises generic processors suitably programmed to execute the claimed steps. Hence, the additional elements in the claims are all generic components suitably programmed to perform their respective functions. The additional elements in all the steps are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic computer components performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. 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. Hence, claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does 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, using the additional elements (identified above) to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Hence, independent claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-9, when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitations only refine the abstract idea further.
For instance, in claims 2-4, the steps “including conducting an interview between a company and the participant and accessing an interview data by the company and the participant wherein the interview data includes particulars of the interview”,
“wherein by encompassing tangible, intangible, and alternative capital, the method ensures a more holistic approach to asset management and value realization” and
“wherein the method dynamically adjusts to market changes and inputs of the participant thereby makes the system highly adaptable and forward-looking” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 5-6, the steps “wherein an integration of a digital marketplace with advanced matching algorithms and smart contract technology ensures efficient, transparent, and secure transactions”,
“wherein the transactions include contract execution and compliance monitoring” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In claims 7-9, the steps “wherein the thematic pools are based on any of complementary, adjacent, or tangential characteristics of the similar asset groups”,
“including verification of the assets declared and protecting sensitive data related to the participant to ensure compliance with data privacy regulations” and
“including a feedback mechanism for the participant to rate a transaction experience and provide suggestions” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, are further refinements of methods of organizing human activity because these steps describe the intermediate steps of the underlying process.
In all the dependent claims, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the limitations 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. Also, the claims do not affect an improvement to another technology or technical field; the claims do not amount to an improvement to the functioning of a computer system itself; the claims do not affect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and the claims do not move beyond a general link of the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. In addition, the dependent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements of the instant underlying process, when taken in combination, together do not offer substantially more than the sum of the functions of the elements when each is taken alone. The claims as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. For these reasons, the dependent claims also are not patent eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 1-9 would be allowable, over prior art, if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter over prior art:
The closest prior art of record, (Thomas; Tracey R. US Pub. 20150228012 A1 and Wester; Stuart Houston (US Patent 8229828 B1), considered individually or in combination, fail to teach the steps of “synthesizing actionable strategies for each of the thematic pools; and categorizing the actionable strategies into supply and demand segments, aligning with current market needs and capability of the participant”. Page 3 of 13Appl. No.: 14/331,106For these reasons claim 1 is deemed allowable over prior art. Dependent claims 2-9, are allowable over prior art by virtue of dependency on an allowable claim.
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
(a) Rauniar; Deepak Kumar et al. (US Pub. 2025/0029179 A1) discloses an Energy Asset Financing marketplace that is an innovative digital platform designed to bridge the investment gap in global energy funding and promote clean energy. The marketplace connects global investors and asset owners offering customized financial instruments and increasing access to finance. It utilizes advanced technologies like blockchain, AI, and data analytics to ensure innovation, seamless operations, and personalized user experiences. Asset owners submit funding proposals. The marketplace prioritizes financially viable assets through rigorous evaluation processes promoting sound investment opportunities. Investors can explore various investment opportunities and actively participate in financing energy assets aligned with their objectives. The platform offers a user-friendly interface, comprehensive information on financial instruments and energy assets, and supports secure transactions and multiple currencies. Tokenization technology allows for fractional ownership and trading of energy assets. Tokens also serve as a reward for sustainable practices. To summarize, the marketplace revolutionizes
(b) Bjontegard; Bernt Erik et al. (US Pub. 2025/0322460 A1) discloses a system for managing financial portfolio as well as for recommending personalized investment strategies, is disclosed. The system includes a first computing unit having an application interface, communicably connected to a central controller. The central controller includes a back-end server. The backend server includes a data receiving component adapted to receive the input data-sets from the first computing unit and real time data-sets from a plurality of data-sources. The backend server further includes a data analysis module adapted to process the real-time data to generate one or more actionable insights. The backend server furthermore includes a contextually intelligent portfolio management module adapted to utilize one or more contextual data related to the user, to monitors the user's investments and asset portfolios, and generate contextually relevant portfolio information for the user in a real-time. The backend server additionally includes a financial strategy implementation module adapted to utilize the actionable insights in combination with the contextually relevant portfolio information of the user to generate personalized investment strategies and recommendations for each user. In operation, a user generates and/or formulate at least one input query based at least in part on one or more input data-sets related to the user's financial portfolio. Thereafter, the input datasets are received at the back-end server which in turn are processed by the financial strategy implementation module in combination with one or more actionable insights generated by the data analysis module of the back-end server to identify a response to the input query, and/or provide one or more personalized investment related recommendation. The identified information and/or recommendation is elicited as a response to the input query and is presented and/or visualized on an output component of the first computing unit.
6. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Narayanswamy Subramanian whose telephone number is (571) 272-6751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Abhishek Vyas can be reached at (571) 270-1836. The fax number for Formal or Official faxes and Draft to the Patent Office 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.
/Narayanswamy Subramanian/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3691
January 23, 2026