DETAILED ACTION
The following NON-FINAL Office Action is in response to application 18/708714 filed on 05/09/2024.
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 . 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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 are currently pending and have been rejected as follows.
Priority
Examiner has noted that the Applicant has claimed priority from the foreign application KR10-2021-0153974 filed on 11/10/2021 and PCT/KR2022/017649 filed on 11/10/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/09/2024 comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98, and MPEP 609 and were considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-4, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the information” and “the location” in “wherein the flight information includes one or more pieces of information selected from the information regarding the departure date of the aircraft, departure time, stopovers, destination, time difference from the departure location, and the location of the arrival airport, associated with an airline schedule”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner recommends Applicant amend the limitation to recite “information” and “a location”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the location”, “the distance”, and “the mode” in “wherein the accommodation day count information further includes one or more pieces of information selected from the location of the accommodation, the distance from the arrival airport to the accommodation, and the mode of transportation from the arrival airport to the accommodation, associated with an airline schedule”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner recommends Applicant amend the limitation to recite “a location”, “a distance”, and “a mode”.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the experience schedule management unit” in “wherein the experience schedule management unit of the service server further includes a step of extracting experience program schedule information from local experience travel information received from at least one third-party experience program management server through the data transmission/reception unit”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner recommends Applicant amend the limitation to recite “an experience schedule management unit”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the received schedule correction information” and “the airline flight information” in “the airline schedule management unit transmits the received schedule correction information from the airline server, which transmitted the airline flight information via the data transmission/reception unit, to the traveler”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Examiner recommends Applicant amend the limitation to recite “received schedule correction information” and “airline flight information”.
Claim 8 also recites the limitation “the experiential schedule management unit” in “the experiential schedule management unit extracts experience program schedule information from at least one third-party experience program management server based on local experience travel information received via the data transmission/reception unit, compares the extracted experience program schedule information with the accommodation schedule information”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner recommends Applicant amend the limitation to recite “an experiential schedule management unit”.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding Claims 1-8 and 10:
Step 1
Claims 1-8 are directed to a method (i.e., a process). Therefore, the claims all fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Claim 10 is directed to “signals per se”. The broadest reasonable interpretation of “storage medium” encompasses non-statutory forms of signal transmission (propagating electrical, electromagnetic signal, or carrier wave).
Therefore, Claim 10 is not directed to a patent eligible category of invention. See MPEP 2106.03(I). Because the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim covers signal per se, the claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. For the purpose of compact prosecution, Examiner will continue analysis of the claimed invention as though it has been amended to exclude non-statutory subject matter.
Step 2A Prong 1
Independent Claim 1 recites the limitations of:
receiving travel departure date information and travel arrival date information from a traveler…
transmitting the travel departure date information…
transmitting flight information received…to the traveler … and transmitting selected boarding information from the traveler …
calculating accommodation day count information of the traveler from the boarding information…
transmitting the accommodation day count information …
transmitting accommodation schedule information received … to the traveler … and transmitting selected accommodation information from the traveler, matching the accommodation information to the accommodation schedule information, ….; and
transmitting flight information and accommodation information to the traveler …
The limitations of Claim 1 stated above are processes that under broadest reasonable interpretation covers “certain methods of organizing human activity” (“managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people” or “commercial or legal interactions”). Specifically, commercial interactions directed towards arranging travel services and accommodations for a traveler. Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Paragraph 28-29 of the specification states “The present invention enables the reservation of accommodation taking into account gaps or additions in travel schedules that may occur due to time differences by providing a method for providing a travel schedule associated with an air itinerary…The present invention enables the anticipation of changes in travel schedules by receiving alarm information related to flight schedules and providing it to travelers, thereby allowing for the addition or return of accommodation schedules that may occur due to changes in flight schedules” which is further evidence of commercial interactions.
Step 2A Prong 2
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Independent claim 1 recites the additional elements of: a data transmission/reception unit of a service server; at least one airline server [to which the flight information is transmitted]; an airline management unit of the service server; an airline schedule management unit of the service server; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; at least one accommodation reservation server [to which the accommodation schedule information is transmitted]; an accommodation information management unit of the service server; and an accommodation schedule management unit of the service server.
The additional elements of a data transmission/reception unit of a service server; at least one airline server [to which the flight information is transmitted]; an airline management unit of the service server; an airline schedule management unit of the service server; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; at least one accommodation reservation server [to which the accommodation schedule information is transmitted]; an accommodation information management unit of the service server; and an accommodation schedule management unit of the service server are recited at a high-level of generality (generic computer/functions), such that, when viewed as whole/ordered combination, it amounts to no more than mere instruction to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(f) “Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception”.
Thus, the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application as the additional elements are mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components which does not impose meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
The claims 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 element of a data transmission/reception unit of a service server; at least one airline server [to which the flight information is transmitted]; an airline management unit of the service server; an airline schedule management unit of the service server; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; at least one accommodation reservation server [to which the accommodation schedule information is transmitted]; an accommodation information management unit of the service server; and an accommodation schedule management unit of the service server to perform the steps recited above amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
None of the steps of Claim 1 when evaluated individually or as an ordered combination amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The data transmission/reception unit of a service server; at least one airline server [to which the flight information is transmitted]; an airline management unit of the service server; an airline schedule management unit of the service server; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; at least one accommodation reservation server [to which the accommodation schedule information is transmitted]; an accommodation information management unit of the service server; and an accommodation schedule management unit of the service server are merely used to perform the limitations directed to organizing human activity, thus, the analysis does not change when considered as an ordered combination. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer which cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, the additional elements do not meaningfully limit the claim. Accordingly, Claim 1 is ineligible.
Dependent Claims 2-8 and 10 when considered both separately and in ordered combination with each dependent claim’s corresponding parent claims do not overcome the above analysis.
Claim 2 further specifies limitations directed to commercial interactions as schedule adjustment information is received which impacts and changes a traveler’s travel and accommodation plans.
Claim 3 further specifies what flight information includes, Claim 4 further specifies what the accommodation day count information further includes, and Claim 5 further specifies that selected accommodation information is transmitted to the at least one accommodation reservation server. Such limitations are further directed to the abstract idea of organizing human activity, specifically commercial interactions.
Claim 6-7 further specifies limitations directed to commercial interactions as experience programs are arranged and scheduled for the traveler during a schedule gap. The claims add an additional element of at least one third-party experience program management server which is recited at a high-level of generality (generic computer/functions), such that, when viewed as whole/ordered combination, it amounts to no more than mere instruction to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(f) “Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception”.
Claim 8 further specifies limitations directed to commercial interactions as schedule adjustment information is received which impacts and changes a traveler’s travel and accommodation plans experience programs are arranged and scheduled for the traveler during a schedule gap. The claim adds an additional element of experiential schedule management unit and at least one third-party experience program management server which is recited at a high-level of generality (generic computer/functions), such that, when viewed as whole/ordered combination, it amounts to no more than mere instruction to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components.
Claim 10 adds an additional element of a storage medium which is recited at a high-level of generality (generic computer/functions), such that, when viewed as whole/ordered combination, it amounts to no more than mere instruction to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components.
The dependent claims further narrow the identified abstract idea but do not otherwise alter the analysis presented above. Nothing in dependent claims 2-8 and 10 when viewed alone or as an ordered combination, adds additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claims 1-8 and 10 are ineligible.
Regarding Claim 9
Step 1
Claim 9 is directed to a system (i.e., a machine). Therefore, the claim falls within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong 1
Independent Claim 9 recites the limitations of:
transmit at least one travel departure schedule information …
transmit flight information received …to travelers, and to transmit selected boarding information from the travelers …;
calculate the accommodation day count information of travelers from the boarding information or to transmit flight information and accommodation information to travelers…;
transmit the accommodation day count information to…; and
transmit accommodation schedule information received …to travelers … and to transmit selected accommodation information from the travelers … matching the accommodation information to the accommodation schedule information
The limitations of Claim 9 stated above are processes that under broadest reasonable interpretation covers “certain methods of organizing human activity” (“managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people” or “commercial or legal interactions”). Specifically, commercial interactions directed towards arranging travel services and accommodations for a traveler. Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Paragraph 28-29 of the specification states “The present invention enables the reservation of accommodation taking into account gaps or additions in travel schedules that may occur due to time differences by providing a method for providing a travel schedule associated with an air itinerary…The present invention enables the anticipation of changes in travel schedules by receiving alarm information related to flight schedules and providing it to travelers, thereby allowing for the addition or return of accommodation schedules that may occur due to changes in flight schedules” which is further evidence of commercial interactions.
Step 2A Prong 2
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Independent claim 9 recites the additional elements of: a data transmission/reception unit capable of wired or wireless data transmission/reception with travelers, airline servers, or accommodation reservation servers; an airline management unit; at least one airline server [to which the flight information was transmitted]; an airline schedule management unit; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; an accommodation information management unit; at least one accommodation reservation server; an accommodation schedule management unit; and comprising an accommodation reservation system associated with airline schedules.
The additional elements of a data transmission/reception unit capable of wired or wireless data transmission/reception with travelers, airline servers, or accommodation reservation servers; an airline management unit; at least one airline server [to which the flight information was transmitted]; an airline schedule management unit; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; an accommodation information management unit; at least one accommodation reservation server; an accommodation schedule management unit; and comprising an accommodation reservation system associated with airline schedules are recited at a high-level of generality (generic computer/functions), such that, when viewed as whole/ordered combination, it amounts to no more than mere instruction to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(f) “Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception”.
Thus, the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application as the additional elements are mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components which does not impose meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
The claims 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 element of a data transmission/reception unit capable of wired or wireless data transmission/reception with travelers, airline servers, or accommodation reservation servers; an airline management unit; at least one airline server [to which the flight information was transmitted]; an airline schedule management unit; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; an accommodation information management unit; at least one accommodation reservation server; an accommodation schedule management unit; and comprising an accommodation reservation system associated with airline schedules to perform the steps recited above amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
None of the functions of Claim 9 when evaluated individually or as an ordered combination amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The data transmission/reception unit capable of wired or wireless data transmission/reception with travelers, airline servers, or accommodation reservation servers; an airline management unit; at least one airline server [to which the flight information was transmitted]; an airline schedule management unit; a travel schedule management unit of the service server; an accommodation information management unit; at least one accommodation reservation server; an accommodation schedule management unit; and comprising an accommodation reservation system associated with airline schedules are merely used to perform the limitations directed to organizing human activity, thus, the analysis does not change when considered as an ordered combination. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer which cannot provide an inventive concept. Thus, the additional elements do not meaningfully limit the claim. Accordingly, Claim 9 is ineligible.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krone et al. (US Patent No. 8,788,303) in view of Kwoh (US2001/0034625) in view of Fang et al. (US2018/0276771).
As per independent Claim 1,
Krone teaches a method of providing a travel schedule associated with an airline schedule, characterized by comprising the following steps:
receiving travel departure date information and travel arrival date information from a traveler through a data transmission/reception unit of a service server (figure 3 and Col. 8 Line 52 to Col. 9 Line 18 where a user can enter “travel itinerary parameters” by selecting a departure date and time and return date and time; Col. 7 Line 54 to Col. 8 Line 3 where the reservation server generates web pages that solicit travel itinerary parameters from users)
transmitting the travel departure date information to at least one airline server through the data transmission/reception unit by an airline management unit of the service server (Col. 8 Lines 4-32 where the reservation server requests availability information by sending the travel itinerary parameters to an availability server)
transmitting flight information received from at least one of the airline servers through the data transmission/reception unit to the traveler by an airline schedule management unit of the service server (Col. 8 Lines 4-32 where the availability server accesses data to determine fare class availability which it sends to the reservation server; Col. 8 Lines 33-51 the reservation server uses the received fare class availability data to generate a calendar display on the user’s user interface)
and transmitting selected boarding information from the traveler to the airline server to which the flight information is transmitted (Col. 8 Lines 33-51 the user can interact with the reservation server through the user interface to book a reservation and the reservation server notifies the availability server of the booking)
transmitting flight information to the traveler through the data transmission/reception unit by the travel schedule management unit (Col. 8 Lines 33-51 the reservation server uses the received fare class availability data to generate a calendar display on the user’s user interface; figure 2 and 7 and Col. 11 Line 3-47 flight availability versus fare classes chart is displayed to the user)
Krone does not teach, but Kwoh teaches:
calculating accommodation day count information of the traveler from the boarding information (see Kwoh para. 6 the user is prompted to enter a hotel location and a number of nights to reside at the hotel where the number of nights can be determined based on the duration of time between the airplane departure date and the airplane return date; figure 9 and para. 45-46 the number of nights is gleamed from the amount of time between the departure flight and the return flight)
Examiner noting that Krone teaches the “by a travel schedule management unit of the service server”. Kwoh is relied upon to modify the service server to also perform “calculating”.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone invention with Kwoh with the motivation of increasing convenience for a traveler as they can book a complete travel package while booking their flight.
See Kwoh para. 2 “With the advancement of the Internet, electronic travel agencies for searching and booking airline tickets have become common. With more and more hotels and car rental agencies joining the ranks of e-commerce, a complete travel product package can be determined and booked without physically speaking to a travel agent” and para. 6 “In an embodiment, a user is prompted to select an airline departure date, a departure location, a destination location, and a seat class. The user is also prompted to enter a hotel location and a number of nights to reside at the hotel. Furthermore, a user is prompted to select a rental car location and a number of days a rental car will be rented.”
Kwoh teaches the “accommodation day count information”. However, Krone/Kwoh does not teach, but
Fang teaches:
transmitting the accommodation day count information to at least one accommodation reservation server through the data transmission/reception unit by an accommodation information management unit of the computer (figure 9 and para. 52 a user at a computer communicates a hotel availability request to a server where the request includes parameters such as location, dates of availability, rating, or any other suitable parameter)
transmitting accommodation schedule information received from at least one accommodation reservation server through the data transmission/reception unit to the traveler by an accommodation schedule management unit of the computer (para. 52-53 the server determines one or more hotels that meet the parameters of the request and a list of available rooms for the user to view)
transmitting selected accommodation information from the traveler, matching the accommodation information to the accommodation schedule information, to the accommodation reservation server to which the accommodation schedule information is transmitted (para. 54 the server may receive a hotel reservation request from the user indicating the user wishes to reserve a room at a selected hotel)
transmitting accommodation information to the traveler through the data transmission/reception unit by the travel schedule management unit (para. 54-55 the server communicates specific hotel reservation information and confirmation to the user)
Examiner noting that Krone teaches the service server. Fang is relied upon to modify the service server to also perform the limitations of “transmitting”.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone/Kwoh “complete travel product” booking system with Fang with the motivation of improving the quality and quantity of information about potential room reservations.
See Fang para. 3-4 “Online hospitality reservation systems attempt to provide an ever-increasing quality and quantity of information in a digestible fashion about potential room reservations to improve the accuracy and convenience of the online hospitality reservation experience. As a result of limitations in existing technology, the quality and quantity of information about potential room reservations is lacking. Accordingly, there is a need for improved systems and methods for making reservations and lodging arrangements in hospitality establishments, such as hotels…. It would be advantageous to introduce systems and methods that further the presentation of information regarding potential room reservations in hospitality lodging establishments and other transitory establishments to ensure a higher rate of completion of reservations and reduce misinformation. It would also be desirable to enable a computer-based solution that would improve the quality and quantity of information about potential room reservations. To better address one or more of these concerns, a system and method for making reservations in a hospitality establishment are disclosed.”
As per dependent Claim 3,
Krone/Kwoh/Fang teaches the method according to claim 1.
Krone further teaches:
wherein the flight information includes one or more pieces of information selected from the information regarding the departure date of the aircraft, departure time, stopovers, destination, time difference from the departure location, and the location of the arrival airport, associated with an airline schedule (figure 3 and Col. 8 Line 52 to Col. 9 Line 18 where a user can enter “travel itinerary parameters” such as an origination location, destination location, desired departure/return time; see also figure 7 and Col. 11 Lines 3-47 where the fare availability information indicates the departure and arrival city)
As per dependent Claim 4,
Krone/Kwoh/Fang teaches the method according to claim 1.
Krone does not teach, but Kwoh teaches:
wherein the accommodation day count information further includes one or more pieces of information selected from the location of the accommodation, the distance from the arrival airport to the accommodation, and the mode of transportation from the arrival airport to the accommodation, associated with an airline schedule (see Kwoh para. 6 the user is prompted to enter a hotel location and a number of nights to reside at the hotel where the number of nights can be determined based on the duration of time between the airplane departure date and the airplane return date; figure 9 and para. 45-46 the city in which the hotel is located is obtained from the user’s selection of an airplane destination city)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone invention with Kwoh with the motivation of increasing convenience for a traveler as they can book a complete travel package while booking their flight.
See Kwoh para. 2 “With the advancement of the Internet, electronic travel agencies for searching and booking airline tickets have become common. With more and more hotels and car rental agencies joining the ranks of e-commerce, a complete travel product package can be determined and booked without physically speaking to a travel agent” and para. 6 “In an embodiment, a user is prompted to select an airline departure date, a departure location, a destination location, and a seat class. The user is also prompted to enter a hotel location and a number of nights to reside at the hotel. Furthermore, a user is prompted to select a rental car location and a number of days a rental car will be rented.”
As per dependent Claim 5,
Krone/Kwoh/Fang teaches the method according to claim 1.
Krone does not teach, but Kwoh teaches:
server associated with an airline schedule (para. 22 processor within the server is linked to airline, hotel room, car rental database; para. 36 processor selects flight travel products by searching through global distribution server; para. 40 the processor selects hotel travel products by searching through the global distribution server)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone invention with Kwoh with the motivation of increasing convenience for a traveler as they can book a complete travel package while booking their flight. See Kwoh para. 2.
Krone/Kwoh does not teach, but Fang teaches:
wherein the selected accommodation information is equipped to be transmitted to at least one accommodation reservation server (para. 54 the server may receive a hotel reservation request from the user indicating the user wishes to reserve a room at a selected hotel)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone/Kwoh “complete travel product” booking system with Fang with the motivation of improving the quality and quantity of information about potential room reservations. See Fang para. 3-4.
As per dependent Claim 10,
Krone/Kwoh/Fang teaches the method according to claim 1.
Krone further teaches:
A storage medium storing a program for executing the method according to claim 1 (Krone Col. 11 Line 48 to Col. 12 Line 20)
As per independent Claim 9,
Krone teaches an accommodation reservation system associated with airline schedules, comprising:
a data transmission/reception unit capable of wired or wireless data transmission/reception with travelers, airline servers, or accommodation reservation servers (figure 2 and Col. 7 Line 54 to Col. 8 Line 3 reservation server communicates (through a network) with client devices)
an airline management unit equipped to transmit at least one travel departure schedule information to at least one airline server through the data transmission/reception unit (figure 3 and Col. 8 Line 52 to Col. 9 Line 18 where a user can enter “travel itinerary parameters” by selecting a departure date and time and return date and time; Col. 7 Line 54 to Col. 8 Line 3 where the reservation server generates web pages that solicit travel itinerary parameters from users; Col. 8 Lines 4-32 where the reservation server requests availability information by sending the travel itinerary parameters to an availability server)
an airline schedule management unit equipped to transmit flight information received from at least one airline server through the data transmission/reception unit to travelers, and to transmit selected boarding information from the travelers to the airline server to which the flight information was transmitted; (Col. 8 Lines 4-32 where the availability server accesses data to determine fare class availability which it sends to the reservation server; Col. 8 Lines 33-51 the reservation server uses the received fare class availability data to generate a calendar display on the user’s user interface; Col. 8 Lines 33-51 the user can interact with the reservation server through the user interface to book a reservation and the reservation server notifies the availability server of the booking)
a travel schedule management unit of the service server equipped to transmit flight information to travelers through the data transmission/reception unit (Col. 8 Lines 33-51 the reservation server uses the received fare class availability data to generate a calendar display on the user’s user interface; figure 2 and 7 and Col. 11 Line 3-47 flight availability versus fare classes chart is displayed to the user)
Krone does not teach, but Kwoh teaches:
calculate the accommodation day count information of travelers from the boarding information (see Kwoh para. 6 the user is prompted to enter a hotel location and a number of nights to reside at the hotel where the number of nights can be determined based on the duration of time between the airplane departure date and the airplane return date; figure 9 and para. 45-46 the number of nights is gleamed from the amount of time between the departure flight and the return flight)
comprising an accommodation reservation system associated with airline schedules (para. 22 processor within the server is linked to airline, hotel room, car rental database; para. 36 processor selects flight travel products by searching through global distribution server; para. 40 the processor selects hotel travel products by searching through the global distribution server)
Examiner noting that Krone teaches the “a travel schedule management unit of the service server equipped to”. Kwoh is relied upon to modify the service server to also perform “calculate”.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone invention with Kwoh with the motivation of increasing convenience for a traveler as they can book a complete travel package while booking their flight.
See Kwoh para. 2 “With the advancement of the Internet, electronic travel agencies for searching and booking airline tickets have become common. With more and more hotels and car rental agencies joining the ranks of e-commerce, a complete travel product package can be determined and booked without physically speaking to a travel agent” and para. 6 “In an embodiment, a user is prompted to select an airline departure date, a departure location, a destination location, and a seat class. The user is also prompted to enter a hotel location and a number of nights to reside at the hotel. Furthermore, a user is prompted to select a rental car location and a number of days a rental car will be rented.”
Kwoh teaches the “accommodation day count information”. However, Krone/Kwoh does not teach, but
Fang teaches:
transmit accommodation information to travelers through the data transmission/reception unit (para. 54-55 the server communicates specific hotel reservation information and confirmation to the user)
an accommodation information management unit equipped to transmit the accommodation day count information to at least one accommodation reservation server through the data transmission/reception unit (figure 9 and para. 52 a user at a computer communicates a hotel availability request to a server where the request includes parameters such as location, dates of availability, rating, or any other suitable parameter)
an accommodation schedule management unit equipped to transmit accommodation schedule information received from at least one accommodation reservation server to travelers through the data transmission/reception unit (para. 52-53 the server determines one or more hotels that meet the parameters of the request and a list of available rooms for the user to view)
and to transmit selected accommodation information from the travelers to the accommodation reservation server matching the accommodation information to the accommodation schedule information (para. 54 the server may receive a hotel reservation request from the user indicating the user wishes to reserve a room at a selected hotel)
Examiner noting that Krone teaches the service server. Fang is relied upon to modify the service server to also perform the limitations of “transmit”.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone/Kwoh “complete travel product” booking system with Fang with the motivation of improving the quality and quantity of information about potential room reservations.
See Fang para. 3-4 “Online hospitality reservation systems attempt to provide an ever-increasing quality and quantity of information in a digestible fashion about potential room reservations to improve the accuracy and convenience of the online hospitality reservation experience. As a result of limitations in existing technology, the quality and quantity of information about potential room reservations is lacking. Accordingly, there is a need for improved systems and methods for making reservations and lodging arrangements in hospitality establishments, such as hotels…. It would be advantageous to introduce systems and methods that further the presentation of information regarding potential room reservations in hospitality lodging establishments and other transitory establishments to ensure a higher rate of completion of reservations and reduce misinformation. It would also be desirable to enable a computer-based solution that would improve the quality and quantity of information about potential room reservations. To better address one or more of these concerns, a system and method for making reservations in a hospitality establishment are disclosed.”
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krone et al. (US Patent No. 8,788,303) in view of Kwoh (US2001/0034625) in view of Fang et al. (US2018/0276771) as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Yalcin et al. (US2015/0161528) in view of Omar (US2015/0149220).
As per dependent Claim 2,
Krone/Kwoh/Fang teaches the method according to claim 1.
Krone/Kwoh/Fang does not teach, but Yalcin teaches:
if the airline schedule management unit receives schedule adjustment information for the boarding information from the airline server to which the flight information is transmitted through the data transmission/reception unit (para. 21 travel services in travel itinerary and para. 22 travel incidents (delay or missed flight); para. 28 travel incident detection module; figure 3 and para. 42-48 incident data may be received from airport data processing systems or departure control systems (DCS); para. 32-33 servers implementing any of the systems/components discussed)
a step of calculating updated accommodation day count information from the schedule adjustment information by the travel schedule management unit (para. 52-53 once travel incident is detected, determining impacted travel services in the itinerary; para. 54 an overnight stay is required thus hotel reservation is impacted and if traveler needs to take an early flight the next day, a hotel reservation is required; para. 55-56 defining constraints for services like hotels (replacement flight arrives early enough to avoid the need for a hotel stay))
a step of comparing the updated accommodation day count information with the accommodation day count information received through the data transmission/reception unit by the accommodation schedule management unit, calculating accommodation addition information or accommodation reduction information, transmitting the accommodation addition information corresponding to the accommodation addition request information or the accommodation reduction information corresponding to the accommodation reduction request information from the traveler to at least one accommodation reservation server (figure 5 and para. 57-60 where in para. 58 where a hotel reservation may be added for any layover in Brussels, a hotel reservation may be canceled for any layover in Paris, etc.; para. 62 the proposals are provided to the traveler and the traveler may select a proposal; para. 64-65 itinerary actualization where once proposal is validated, the itinerary is updated through cancelling/rebooking processes; para. 92 where Mr. Lee chooses offer 3 and his hotel is rebooked accordingly; para. 59 access to hotel reservation system from which travel systems may be searched, booked, reserved; para. 32-33 servers implementing any of the systems/components discussed)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone/Kwoh/Fang with Yalcin with the motivation of increasing convenience for a user to travel with as few disturbances as is feasible.
See Yalcin Para. 39 “missing one of the elements of an initial itinerary may create cascading impacts on the complete journey. For example, taking the next flight to a destination will typically lead to a later arrival, a car rental office being already closed, or a pre-booked taxi being missed. Even a hotel room reservation may be expired due to extended delay. As such, a traveler may be left on his or her own when attempting to update or cancel all of these impacted elements, which often can be complicated, time consuming, irritating and stressful for the traveler” and para. 20 “Embodiments consistent with one aspect of the invention detect unplanned travel incidents and subsequently propose accurate, operationally efficient, suitable rebook options to a traveler for the traveler's travel itinerary, thereby assisting a traveler with updating his or her travel itinerary so that the traveler desirably can continue on his or her initial journey with as few disturbances as is feasible, and without the stress of having to manually substitute any impacted booking elements or travel services.”
Krone/Kwoh/Fang/Yalcin does not teach, but Omar teaches:
the method further includes a step of transmitting the schedule adjustment information to the traveler (para. 15 travel events include cancellation, delay, timing change affecting a reservation, environmental change affecting travel, etc. where the reservation may be for an airline or hotel; para. 50 where a reservation impact is detected, transmit a message to the subscriber; para. 31 transmit notifications to individuals upon detection of an event (deviation from a travel plan; para. 72 reservation notifications of canceling travel segments)
receiving the accommodation renewal information from at least one accommodation reservation system (para. 56 cancellation event received; para. 57-59 query travel provider (TSPI agent associated with the service provider) for alternative options; para. 18-19 modules)
transmitting the accommodation renewal information to the traveler by the accommodation schedule management unit (para. 59 traveler is notified about the updated travel plan record)
Examiner noting that previous references (for example, Yalcin) teach “at least one accommodation reservation server”. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Krone/Kwoh/Fang/Yalcin with Omar with the motivation of increasing efficiency for the traveler by coordinating alternative travel plans.
See Omar para. 1 “Accordingly, coordinating any travel interruptions between service providers is becoming increasingly important in order to save on travel costs and time, while maintaining convenience. Such coordination may require sharing information such as, for example, traveler information, travel progress, current events, and any other data relevant to coordinate travel between service providers. However, such coordination should be accurate and efficient to provide proper service for the dynamic environment of travel planning. These and other drawbacks exist” and para. 16 “When a travel event occurs that may impact reservations such that a traveler may need to make adjustments to the travel reservations, the travel assistance system (TAS) may compile travel event information, analyze the travel event information to identify any impact on reservations, identify available options to accommodate the travel event information, propose and implement changes in the reservations, and coordinate with corresponding service providers according to traveler preference. For example, unexpected events, such as travel delays, unexpected weather conditions, results-dependent sporting competitions may impact travel plans and require dynamic changes to a reservations. As another example, location information associated with a traveler can be used to alert the service provider in advance about the traveler arrival delay, and can be used by the TAS system to solicit an alternative reservation with potential incentives for both the traveler and the service provider.”
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krone et al. (US Patent No. 8,788,303) in view of Kwoh (US2001/0034625) in view of Fang et al. (US2018/0276771) as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Brown (US2007/0078729).
As per dependent Claim 6,
Krone/Kwoh/Fang teaches the method according to claim 1.
Krone/Kwoh/Fang does not teach, but Brown teaches:
wherein the experience schedule management unit of the service server further includes a step of extracting experience program schedule information from local experience travel information received from at least one third-party experience program management server through the data transmission/reception unit (figures 11-12 and para. 111-112 the supplier populates an activities database on the web server side of the system; para. 91 itinerary planning tool resides in a server; para. 94 and figure 2 activities are retrieved from the activity database)
a step of comparing the experience program schedule information with the accommodation schedule information, calculating a schedule gap information between the experience end time included in the experience program schedule information and the check-out time included in the accommodation schedule information or the departure time included in the flight information, and (para. 42 invention determines whether there is sufficient time available to carry out activities by accounting for transportation times, selected mode of transportation, and the time needed to check out of accommodations; para. 70 “filling up the rest of the time/gaps with the meal/food activities or any fun/tourist activities”; para. 99 forcing a return t