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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/10/2025 have been fully considered.
The 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections have been withdrawn in view of the applicant’s arguments
and amendment filed 9/10/2025.
After a further review of the instant claims, it appears that claims 1-20 do not recite statutory subject matter. Accordingly, the Examiner is obliged to submit a 35 USC 101 rejection.
The Examiner regrets the delayed process of the application.
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 directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Subject Matter Eligibility Standard
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Specifically, claim 15 is directed to a system. Claims 1 and 8 are directed to a method. Each of the claims falls under one of the four statutory classes of invention.
If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea).
The claims when the bolded limitations are removed recite the following limitations:
Claim 1 recites:
(Currently Amended) A computer-implemented method for product provisioning, comprising:
receiving, by a management server, from a mobile device executing a ride application orchestrating a ride, a ride protection trigger and corresponding ride information associated with the ride, the ride protection trigger activated automatically by the ride application by the mobile device based on an indication associated with the ride;
identifying, by the management server, a product type based on the received ride
protection trigger and the corresponding ride information;
sending, by the management server, to a product provisioning server, a request for a
dynamic product instance that corresponds to the identified product type, wherein the dynamic product instance is generated by the product provisioning server responsive to the request and based on the corresponding ride information, wherein the dynamic product instance includes a cost that is dynamically determined for the ride; and
automatically acquiring, by the management server, the dynamic product instance based
on at least one of the corresponding ride information and the cost.
Claim 2 recites: wherein the indication associated with the ride comprises one of: (i) the ride application of the mobile device sending a ride request, (ii) the ride application of the mobile device receiving a ride confirmation from a driver in response to the ride request, (iii) detecting that a location of the mobile device is within a threshold distance of a pickup location, or (iv) detecting a monetary exchange involving the ride application.
Claim 3 recites:
sending, by the management server, to the product provisioning server, an application of a user of the mobile device to enroll for the product type; and
in response to receiving an acceptance of the application from the product provisioning server, initiating one or more ride protection triggers associated with the product type.
Claim 4 recites: wherein the product type is a ride insurance policy that insures a user of the mobile device for a duration of the ride.
Claim 5 recites: wherein the corresponding ride information comprises one or more of an identified vehicle, an expected duration of the ride, a make and model of the vehicle, a mileage of the vehicle, a location of the vehicle, an expected path of the ride, a pickup location for the ride, an expected average speed for the ride, personal information of a driver, a driver history of the driver, personal information of a user, rider history of the user, stored information about past drives and past rides of other drivers and riders, or past ride insurance prices of other riders.
Claim 6 recites: wherein the product type is ride insurance, and the method further comprises:
receiving, by a management server, from a mobile device executing a ride application orchestrating a ride, a ride protection trigger and corresponding ride information associated with the ride, the ride protection trigger activated automatically by the ride application by the mobile device based on an indication associated with the ride;
identifying, by the management server, a product type based on the received ride
protection trigger and the corresponding ride information;
sending, by the management server, to a product provisioning server, a request for a
dynamic product instance that corresponds to the identified product type, wherein the dynamic product instance is generated by the product provisioning server responsive to the request and based on the corresponding ride information, wherein the dynamic product instance includes a cost that is dynamically determined for the ride; and
automatically acquiring, by the management server, the dynamic product instance based
on the corresponding ride information.
Claim 9 recites: the indication associated with the ride comprises one of: (i) the ride application of the mobile device sending a ride request, (ii) the ride application of the mobile device receiving a ride confirmation from a driver in response to the ride request, (iii) detecting that a location of the mobile device is within a threshold distance of a pickup location, or (iv) detecting a monetary exchange involving the ride application.
Claim 10 recites: the operations further comprising: sending, by the management server, to the product provisioning server, an application of a user of the mobile device to enroll for the product type; and
in response to receiving an acceptance of the application from the product provisioning server, initiating one or more ride protection triggers associated with the product type.
Claim 11 recites: wherein the product type is a ride insurance policy that insures a user of the mobile device for a duration of the ride.
Claim 12 recites: wherein the identified product type corresponds to an existing product, and the dynamic product instance is a reduced cost for the existing product.
Claim 13 recites: wherein the product type is ride insurance, the operations further comprising:
receiving, from the mobile device, an insurance claim corresponding to the ride insurance, wherein the insurance claim comprises at least one of time-stamped global positioning system (GPS) data of the mobile device and time-stamped GPS data of a vehicle;
sending the insurance claim to the product provisioning server, wherein the product provisioning server validates the insurance claim based on the time-stamped GPS data; and
receiving, from the product provisioning server, an insurance payout based on the insurance claim.
Claim 14 recites: the operations further comprising:
receiving, from the mobile device, a second ride protection trigger for a second ride and corresponding second ride information;
identifying a second product type based on the second ride protection trigger and the corresponding second ride information;
determining that a user of the mobile device is not associated with the second product type; and
sending for display, to the mobile device, a notification that the user does not have the second product type.
Claim 15 recites:
a processor; and
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer program instructions executable by the processor to perform operations, the operations comprising:
receiving, by a management server, from a mobile device executing a ride application orchestrating a ride, a ride protection trigger and corresponding ride information associated with the ride, the ride protection trigger activated automatically by the ride application by the mobile device based on an indication associated with the ride;
identifying, by the management server, a product type based on the received ride protection trigger and the corresponding ride information;
sending, by the management server, to a product provisioning server, a request for a dynamic product instance that corresponds to the identified product type, wherein the dynamic product instance is generated by the product provisioning server responsive to the request and based on the corresponding ride information, wherein the dynamic product instance includes a cost that is dynamically determined for the ride; and
automatically acquiring, by the management server, the dynamic product instance based on the corresponding ride information.
Claim 16 recites: wherein the indication associated with the ride comprises one of: (i) the ride application of the mobile device sending a ride request, (ii) the ride application of the mobile device receiving a ride confirmation from a driver in response to the ride request, (iii) detecting that a location of the mobile device is within a threshold distance of a pickup location, or (iv) detecting a monetary exchange involving the ride application.
Claim 17 recites: the operations further comprising:
sending, by the management server, to the product provisioning server, an application of a user of the mobile device to enroll for the product type; and
in response to receiving an acceptance of the application from the product provisioning server, initiating one or more ride protection triggers associated with the product type.
Claim 18 recites: wherein the product type is a ride insurance policy that insures a user of the mobile device for a duration of the ride.
Claim 19 recites: wherein the product type is ride insurance, the operations further comprising:
receiving, from the mobile device, an insurance claim corresponding to the ride insurance, wherein the insurance claim comprises at least one of time-stamped global positioning system (GPS) data of the mobile device and time-stamped GPS data of a vehicle;
sending the insurance claim to the product provisioning server, wherein the product
provisioning server validates the insurance claim based on the time-stamped GPS data; and
receiving, from the product provisioning server, an insurance payout based on the
insurance claim.
Claim 20 recites: the operations further comprising: receiving, from the mobile device, a second ride protection trigger for a second ride and corresponding second ride
information;
identifying a second product type based on the second ride protection trigger and the corresponding second ride information;
determining that a user of the mobile device is not associated with the second product type; and
sending for display, to the mobile device, a notification that the user does not have the second product type.
As per claims 1, 8 and 16, applicant is to be noted that the steps or functions of “receive” or “receiving”, “identify” or “identifying”, or “acquire” or “acquiring” involve mental/manual processes and/or generic computer functions.
Here, the claimed concept falls into the category of functions of performing mental processes such as concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) because it amounts to the functions of :
Receiving, identifying and acquiring a dynamic product instance based on corresponding ride information.
These functions are viewed as mental/manual processes.
The BRI of the claimed limitations describes functions of :
sending, a request for a dynamic product instance that corresponds to the identified product type, wherein the dynamic product instance is generated responsive to the request and based on the corresponding ride information, wherein the dynamic product instance includes a cost that is dynamically determined for the ride; and automatically acquiring, the dynamic product instance based on at least one of the corresponding ride information and the cost.
Step 2A, Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, In particular, the clams recite the bolded limitations noted above as understood to be the additional limitations.
The claimed “management server”, “mobile device”, “provisioning server” are similarly understood in light of applicant's specification as mere usage of any arrangement of computer software or hardware intermediate components potentially using networks to communicate with instructions are properly understood to be mere instructions to apply the abstraction using a computer or device or computer system.
Performing steps or functions by a processor or a computing system merely limits the abstraction to a computer field by execution by generic computers. See MPEP 2106.05.
As noted in MPEP 2106.04(d), limitations which amount to instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool, limitations which amount to
insignificant extra-solution activity, and limitations which amount to generally linking to a particular technological environment do not integrate a practical exception into a practical application.
“Identifying data” and “acquiring data” are similar to Alappat, which as noted in MPEP 2106. 05(b)(1) is superseded, and the correct analysis is to look whether the added elements integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception. The functions of the claims in the instant application are performed by one or more processors or computing systems which receive data, identify data and acquire data using user interface elements.
Consideration of these steps or functions as a combination does not change the analysis as they do not add anything compared to when the steps are considered separately. The claims recite a particular sequence of functions of “receiving data, identifying data, sending data and acquiring dynamic product instance based on at least one of the corresponding ride information and the cost. Performance of these steps or functions technologically may present a meaningful limit to the scope of the claim does not reasonably integrate the abstraction into a practical application.
Step 2B: The elements discussed above with respect to the practical application in Step 2A, prong 2 are equally applicable to consideration of whether the claims amount to significantly more. Accordingly, the clams fail to recite additional elements which, when considered individually and in combination, amount to significantly more. Reconsideration of these elements identified as insignificant extra-solution activity as part of Step 2B does not change the analysis.
Positively reciting a “management server”, a “mobile device” or a “provisioning server” does not change the analysis as these aspects are properly considered as additional elements which amount to instructions to apply it with a computer.
These claimed elements also as found in the dependent claims are also recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic component.
In processing the claims, it is noted that the recitation of these additional elements do not impact the analysis of the claims because these elements in combination are noted only to be a general purpose computer for performing basic or routine computer functions. The claimed servers and mobile devices are noted to a be each a generic computer for receiving, identifying, sending and acquiring data and expected computer functions therein. These additional elements do not overcome the analysis as these elements are merely considered as additional elements which amount to instructions to be applied to the generic computer.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claimed “servers” and “mobile device” are recited at a high level of generality such they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic components.
Accordingly, the 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.
Accordingly, claims 1, 8 and 15 are directed to an abstract idea.
The dependent claim(s) when analyzed and each taken as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art taken alone or in combination and as argued by the applicant failed to teach or suggest:
“sending, by the management server, to a product provisioning server, a request for a dynamic product instance that corresponds to the identified product type, wherein the dynamic product instance is generated by the product provisioning server responsive to the request and based on the corresponding ride information, wherein the dynamic product instance includes a cost that is dynamically determined for the ride; and automatically acquiring, by the management server, the dynamic product instance based on at least one of the corresponding ride information and the cost” As recited in independent claim 1, and as similarly recited in independent claims 8 and 15.
Coleman et al and Kawahara et al failed to teach or suggest the above noted limitations and as argued by the applicant notably on page 11 of the applicant’s response filed 9/10/2025.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANTZY POINVIL whose telephone number is (571)272-6797. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM to 5:30PM.
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, Michael Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/fp/
/FRANTZY POINVIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
November 19, 2025