DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is a FINAL office action in response to the Applicant’s response filed 6 November 2025.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 16, and 19 have been amended.
The 112 (b) rejection for claims 1-20 have been overcome by amendments.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6 November 2025 with respect to parsing a travel document have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claim 1, the Applicant argues on page 12 of their response, “In contrast to the above-features of present Claim 1, Vavul at paragraphs [0076] and [0082] discloses that a user provides a search request (901) that includes a destination, a mode of travel, and activities linked to a trip. Vavul fails to disclose the parsing of an electronic travel resource planning document by city since Vavul indicates that the user provides only a single destination. Further, since the search is limited to a single user, Vavul does not contemplate a number of rooms needed or a single destination having multiple date ranges of travel for different tour groups. For at least this reason, independent Claim 1 is inventive over Vavul.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s interpretation of the cited prior of record, and the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed invention. First, the Examiner notes that the Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. In this case, the Applicant has referenced figure 1 of their drawings (see pages 11 and 12 of their response), and not the particular claim language, and the specific language of the cited reference. Notably, the Applicant has merely stated that “Vavul at paragraphs [0076] and [0082] discloses that a user provides a search request (901) that includes a destination, a mode of travel, and activities linked to a trip,” that, “Vavul fails to disclose the parsing of an electronic travel resource planning document by city since Vavul indicates that the user provides only a single destination,” and “since the search is limited to a single user, Vavul does not contemplate a number of rooms needed or a single destination having multiple date ranges of travel for different tour groups.” As shown here, the Applicant merely alleges that Vavul does not disclose general concepts, however the Applicant has failed to identify the specific claim elements for which the Applicant is arguing that the Examiner cited Vavul as teaching; thus, the Applicant has made a general allegation of patentability, while failing to state how the specific claim elements differ than the cited reference. Second, with regards to the Applicant’s arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, the Applicant has argued against Vavul here, and against Singh and Amzallag on page 13 of their response, individually, while the rejection was made in view of a combination of references. As such, the Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive as they are not reflective of the previously stated rejection. Third, with regards to the claims, it is noted that the claim 1 states, “receive an electronic travel resource planning document from a tour operator device, the electronic travel resource planning document including cities, arrival dates for the cities, departure dates for the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates…. parse the electronic travel resource planning document by the cities, determine a resource usage date range based on the arrival dates and the departure dates for each parsed city… determine travel resources that have availability or inventory for at least one of the resource usage date ranges based on the availability or inventory indicator.” With regards to these elements, it is noted that Vavul states in paragraphs 76 and 77:
“FIG. 8 is a flowchart that illustrates the steps performed by the Travel Manager 105 to perform customized searches. The method begins at step 802 with the GUI of Travel Manager 105 accepting the requirements of a travel-related request from an end user. These requirements may include preferences of the end user for a destination, a mode of travel, activities linked to a trip, etc. At step 804, these preferences are used to define some of the rules for Decision System 501; other rules may be obtained from Inventory Management Module 401, Contract Management Module 407, and Setup Module 403. Decision System 501 uses all these rules to perform the search. At step 806, Travel Manager 105 begins the search by sending parallel requests to multiple information suppliers. These information suppliers may be databases that provide services related to different aspects of travel or may be Distribution Systems like GDS and ADS. -By performing parallel searches, the Travel Manager is able to significantly reduce the time taken to build a set of valid travel itineraries. Results of the parallel search requests are received, and at step 808, Decision System 501 performs an aggregated search. This aggregated search is performed over multiple information suppliers. These information suppliers may be associated with the client handling the request for a travel solution or may be the information suppliers linked to other clients providing an identical travel solution. At step 810, Decision System 501, combines the results of various searches to generate a valid travel itinerary; this can be achieved by doing exhaustive combinations and permutations, or by using well-known algorithms like Traveling Salesman, A* Technique, Branch and Bound, etc. or by using any other method known in the art.
At step 812, Decision System 501 checks if the travel itinerary generated at step 810 meets the rules set by the user (or the client). If a particular generated itinerary does not meet the rules then it is discarded in step 814 and the method goes back to step 810. In case the itinerary satisfies the rules, this itinerary is selected as a valid itinerary and added to the "work in progress resource" at step 816. The Travel Manager at step 818 unifies the hotel related information available from various information sources. Once all valid itineraries have been built and either added to the "work in progress resource" or discarded, the present method computes the non-dominating itineraries and displays them over the user GUI at step 820. An itinerary is called non-dominating if it is "better" with respect to at least one of the parameters (that has defined by the end user or the client) when compared to all other non-dominating itineraries. For example, if a travel itinerary, A, provides less travel time but higher price than another travel itinerary, B, then both A and B are non-dominating itineraries. However, if another travel itinerary, C, provides more travel time and has a higher cost than A, then C is dominated by A and can be removed (from the set of non-dominating itineraries).” (Emphasis added).
Vavul continues in paragraph 82, “The Aggregator Module has been explained further in conjunction with FIG. 9. Referring to FIG. 9, at step 901, the Travel Manager receives a search request from a user. At step 903, the Travel Manager decides the information sources from which the travel solution related information has to be obtained. At step 905, the Travel Manager makes parallel search requests to these information sources using the Parallel Searching Module #?. The relevant travel solutions as unified are presented to the user at step 907. For unifying the multiple search results the Travel manager may use functionalities like the Unified Hotel Database. At step 909, the user selects the travel plan from amongst the choices presented at step 907. At step 911, the user books the selected travel plan. The selected travel plan may contain travel solutions from multiple suppliers. These suppliers may be related to the client whom the user has requested for the travel solution. These may also be suppliers related to other clients of the Travel Manager. At step 913, the Travel Manager forwards the request for booking the selected travel plan to the suppliers involved in generating that travel plan. These suppliers may include room suppliers 917, air suppliers 919, car suppliers 920, activity suppliers 921 and auction engines 923. Once the Travel Manager receives the confirmation from the concerned suppliers, the user is informed of the booking at step 915. The user may also be provided a Passenger Name Record (PNR) defined? at this step. Using this PNR the user may check the status of the bookings at later stages.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 93, “The system allows clients to search in parallel multiple sources of inventory based on system configurations and combine the results into one result set. Further, during the booking and modification processes, the system can handle multiple requests in parallel, thereby speeding up the overall process. Parallel searching has been further illustrated with the help of FIG. 10. Referring to FIG. 10, at step 1001, user inputs a request for a travel solution. At step 1003, the travel manager decides the information sources from which relevant information can be obtained. These information sources may be room suppliers 1009, air supplier 1011, car suppliers 1013 and activity suppliers 1015, etc. At step 1005, the Travel Manager conducts a parallel search in the identified relevant information sources by transmitting formatted queries to each source without waiting to receive results from each. The search results are received and aggregated at step 1007, after which rule based processing is applied on the results.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 114, “Turning to the method used by the Travel Manager 105 to process information searches and contract filtering in parallel, FIG. 18 provides a flow diagram of steps implemented in such functions. The process may begin when the appropriate search parameters have been received, step 1801, such as from the user, from a client template, from a group (e.g., tour) specification, etc. As discussed above, search parameters will include the types of services required (e.g., air travel, ground transportation, hotel, rental car, local facilities, activities, etc.), as well as pertinent parameters related to those services (e.g., travel dates, special requirements, number of travelers, etc.), as necessary to format queries to appropriate service suppliers.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues on paragraph 115, “In step 1802, the search parameters are processed to identify the various information sources and services that should be queried. Such identifications are made for each type of service required. Information stored in local databases may be accessed to identify the appropriate sources of information to be queried, including the electronic address (e.g., URL), the data structure required to query each source, and other information necessary to format a query to each source, such as an account number, password, client identification, etc. In this step, data on the types and formats of data expected to be received from a query to each information source may be obtained from a database to permit preparing a data table of appropriate format to receive incoming information.” (Emphasis added). With regards to Singh, the reference states in paragraph 4, “Thus, one embodiment provides a method for allocating logistical travel resources. The method includes selecting an inventory of trip packages based in part on user preferences. The trip packages include transport link resource allocations between a departure location and a plurality of destination locations, and lodging allocations for the plurality of destination locations. The method also includes presenting the inventory of trip packages to a plurality of users through a user interface over a communication network. Responsive to receiving trip booking requests from the plurality of users, the method further includes allocating the transport link resource allocations and the lodging allocations, and allocating user financial time commitments.” (Emphasis added). Singh continues in paragraph 21, “Some embodiments include a system for allocating logistical travel resources. In some embodiments, the system includes a server executing an inventory management module for selecting, based in part on user preferences, an inventory of trip packages including transport link resource allocations between a departure location and a plurality of destination locations, and lodging allocations for the plurality of destination locations. In some embodiments, the system includes a user interface module for presenting the inventory of trip packages to a user through a user interface over a communication network. In some embodiments, the system includes a reservation management module for, responsive to receiving a trip booking request from the user for a first trip package included in the inventory of trip packages, allocating a transport link resource allocation and a lodging allocation of the first trip package to the user, allocating a user financial time commitment to the user, and communicating reservation data to the user through the user interface over the communication network.” (Emphasis added). Paragraph 76 of Singh continues, “User-provided preference data includes information provided by users via the user interface 230. For example, the user interface 230 displays one or more user preference forms prompting users to provide information about their travel preferences. The user preference forms request, among other things, preferred trip frequency (for example, how often users want to take trips), preferred destination locations, preferred activities, and the amount of financial resources that users are willing to commit to trip packages. In some embodiments, the user preference forms also request time restrictions (for example, working days and hours), preferred trip types, preferred destination location types, user interests, preferred types of accommodations, preferred modes of transportation, preferred climates, or a combination thereof.” (Emphasis added). Singh continues in paragraph 80, “In some embodiments, the server electronic processor 305 aggregates user-provided preference data, user trait data, observational data, and incidentally-gathered data collected for a group of users to determine user preferences. For example, in a group of one thousand users, the server electronic processor 305 can determine that four hundred users like to go to the beach, two hundred users like to ski, three hundred users like to listen to live music, and one hundred users like to visit museums. Thus, the server electronic processor 305 selects an inventory of trip packages including beach trip packages, skiing trip packages, live music trip packages, and museums trip packages.” (Emphasis added). As shown and emphasized here, Vavul has disclosed a system of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package. Additionally, as shown here, Singh has disclosed a system of querying service providers for resources available in destination cities for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages. With regards to the Applicant’s claims and arguments, it is noted that the claims do not set forth and specifically define an electronic travel resource planning document, merely that it is a document that includes cities, arrival dates for the cities, departure dates for the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates. Thus, the electronic travel resource document, would include a request/inquiry, that includes the provided information; and would not be limited to the format of the Applicant’s figure 1 (representing an example of a travel planning document). In this case, the combination of Vavul and Singh, has disclosed parsing the travel planning information to extract planning requests for trips, wherein the information includes destinations (as disclosed by Singh), and wherein the information includes a number of rooms (i.e. units) that will be required. Fourth, with respect to the Applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a single destination having multiple date ranges of travel for different tour groups) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Thus, the Examiner maintains that the cited prior art discloses the claimed invention, and the Examiner is not persuaded of error.
Applicant's arguments filed 6 November 2025 with regards to the prior art teaching editing a contract template have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claim 1, the Applicant argues on page 12 of their response, “In addition to above, the Office Action at page 20 relies on Vavul to disclose a group travel resource contract generation system that edits a contract template to create a complete contract file by adding a selected at least one resource usage date range, a number of units, and a corresponding resource rate. As disclosed in paragraphs [0007] and [0008] of Applicant's specification, the group travel resource contract generation system automatically populates a contract for group travel with date ranges, a number of units, and an agreed price. Vavul instead discloses that a contract may only include a billing rate of a client. (See Vavul, par. [0109]). Vavul is silent about editing a contract template to create a complete contract file by adding a selected at least one resource usage date range, a number of units, and a corresponding resource rate. For at least this additional reason, independent Claim 1 is inventive over Vavul.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s interpretation of the cited prior art of record and the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed invention. First, with respect to the Applicant’s argument that, “As disclosed in paragraphs [0007] and [0008] of Applicant's specification, the group travel resource contract generation system automatically populates a contract for group travel with date ranges, a number of units, and an agreed price,” it is noted this argument merely relies on a general statement of novelty, with reference to the Applicant’s specification, without specifically pointing to the language of the claims, or the particular citations of the cited prior art. In this case, claim 1 states, “a memory device storing (i) contract term parameters specified by travel resource providers for a respective travel resource, and (ii) a contract template for each travel resource provider specifying the contract term parameters for the respective travel resource… select the contract template that corresponds to the selected travel resource; edit the contract template to create a complete contract file by adding the selected at least one resource usage date range, the number of units, and the corresponding resource rate; cause the complete contract file to be displayed via the user interface of the tour operator device.” With regards to this, it is noted that the claims do not specifically or specially define the contract template or completed contracted file, other than that the template fore contract term parameters, and that the complete contract has the at least one resource usage date range, the number of units, and the corresponding resource rate. With regards to Vavul states in paragraph 49, “Travel Module 105 is customized according to the requirements of a client at the time of installation. The steps involved in installation of Travel Manager 105 for a particular client has been further elaborated with the help of FIG. 2. In step 202, based on the requirements for information of a client, Travel Manager 105 selects the information sources. The list of information sources can be provided by the client or these may be decided by the Travel Manager based on the parameters defined by the client. These parameters may be related to selecting a travel information supplier operating in a geographic region or may be related to a specific travel service (like GDS). These may also be related to selecting information suppliers that have tie-ups with the particular client. In step 204, Travel Manager 105 collects the information that is specific to the client. This information may relate to the clients' organization structure, its policies, its affiliate organizations, the agents working in the organization etc. Travel Manager 105 may further share the common information between the client and organizations/personnel related to the client. This relationship may exist between a client and its affiliates, a client and its co-brands, a client and its agents etc. The information gathered from the client in step 204 is used for defining the rules in step 206. These rules act as guidelines that govern the travel solution for an end user. At step 208, Travel Manager 105 collects and manages the information relating to the complex contracts between the client and its various supplier. These complex contracts may relate to terms and conditions laid down by a client, like availability of rooms, specific benefits for a customer etc. Travel Module 105 facilitates the customization of the GUI for a client in step 210. On the basis of the information collected from a client, Travel Module 205 customizes the GUI. In step 210 the GUI of a client may be customized with respect to the end user the client has or with respect to an agreement a client, a suppliers and an end user may share.” (Emphasis added). Vavul states in paragraph 72, “Travel Manager 105 also makes provisions for capturing and implementing complex contracts between suppliers and clients. These contracts may relate to the terms and conditions defined by a supplier, like the availability of inventory, cost of services, special benefits for a user, etc. Travel Manager 105 maintains a record of such contracts, and uses the conditions mentioned by them to decide their availability and priority in the itinerary displayed to an end user.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 73, “FIG. 7 displays a snapshot of such a contract. The contract displays various types of rooms available in a hotel, and the additional features available in rooms, such as ocean view, availability of a "liquor bar" in the room, etc. The maintenance of such contracts enables customized search to take place (once the end-customer provides his/her query).” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 76, “FIG. 8 is a flowchart that illustrates the steps performed by the Travel Manager 105 to perform customized searches. The method begins at step 802 with the GUI of Travel Manager 105 accepting the requirements of a travel-related request from an end user. These requirements may include preferences of the end user for a destination, a mode of travel, activities linked to a trip, etc. At step 804, these preferences are used to define some of the rules for Decision System 501; other rules may be obtained from Inventory Management Module 401, Contract Management Module 407, and Setup Module 403. Decision System 501 uses all these rules to perform the search. At step 806, Travel Manager 105 begins the search by sending parallel requests to multiple information suppliers. These information suppliers may be databases that provide services related to different aspects of travel or may be Distribution Systems like GDS and ADS. -By performing parallel searches, the Travel Manager is able to significantly reduce the time taken to build a set of valid travel itineraries. Results of the parallel search requests are received, and at step 808, Decision System 501 performs an aggregated search. This aggregated search is performed over multiple information suppliers. These information suppliers may be associated with the client handling the request for a travel solution or may be the information suppliers linked to other clients providing an identical travel solution. At step 810, Decision System 501, combines the results of various searches to generate a valid travel itinerary; this can be achieved by doing exhaustive combinations and permutations, or by using well-known algorithms like Traveling Salesman, A* Technique, Branch and Bound, etc. or by using any other method known in the art.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 89, “Travel Manager 105 also provides the end user with an option of selecting an activity as a part of the trip, integrating this activity, and then optimizing the trip. For instance, on selecting a trip to Paris, the user may see on his/her GUI, a trip to Disneyland. By selecting this trip to Disneyland and optimizing it with respect to time and/or cost, the end user may receive a comprehensive itinerary that displays the total time that his/her trip will take and the associated cost.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 94, “FIGS. 11 and 12 illustrate two examples of search results for a particular trip that may be requested by an end user using the disclosed system. The disclosed system generates trip from A to B and B to C by means of parallel searching in multiple databases and then by integrating this data to present two itineraries--one shown in FIG. 11 and the other shown in FIG. 12. The trip shown in FIG. 11 is an integrated travel plan from A to C, which uses an airline and a rented car for the trip. Since the first trip has more halt time in comparison to the trip in FIG. 12, it may provide the end user with an additional activity, such as a trip to location D. The second trip, on the other hand, provides the option of traveling by air on both legs. The invention displays the above results via the user interface non-dominantly with respect to each other result until the user sets a preference for optimization, or selects one of the options. It can be seen that if the user sets a preference for cost, the search result shown in FIG. 11 will dominate. However, if time is the optimization parameter, then the option shown in FIG. 12 which requires less travel time will receive the preference. On the other hand, if the user sets a preference for the nature of the trip (i.e., theme) to be a holiday trip, the option shown in FIG. 11 might gain priority over the option shown in FIG. 12, as that option provides the user with an alternative activity.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 114, “Turning to the method used by the Travel Manager 105 to process information searches and contract filtering in parallel, FIG. 18 provides a flow diagram of steps implemented in such functions. The process may begin when the appropriate search parameters have been received, step 1801, such as from the user, from a client template, from a group (e.g., tour) specification, etc. As discussed above, search parameters will include the types of services required (e.g., air travel, ground transportation, hotel, rental car, local facilities, activities, etc.), as well as pertinent parameters related to those services (e.g., travel dates, special requirements, number of travelers, etc.), as necessary to format queries to appropriate service suppliers.” (Emphasis added). Vavul continues in paragraph 119, “When a sufficient number of query responses have been received, in step 1806 the data table is then passed to the analysis processor discussed above for analysis and contract filtering. This may be accomplished by transmitting the table to another computer or memory location, or simply by indicating to the analysis module (such as by setting a flag) that the results data table is populated and released for analysis. Contract filtering, ranking, eliminating dominated searches and other analyses may be accomplished in parallel since the search results are stored in a single data table. Such analysis thus can be accomplished by comparing and contrasting among selected fields or across multiple rows as one of ordinary skill in the art can appreciate.” (Emphasis added). As shown and emphasized in these sections, Vavul has disclosed storing contract templates that are to be filled with details of a contracted itinerary, wherein the itinerary is formed via searching for requested parameters from a user, and wherein said parameters include the dates booked, the number of resources and rooms needed for the itinerary, and the cost. As such, Vavul has disclosed the argued editing of a contract template to reflect the booking of the users. Therefore, the Examiner maintains that this rejection is proper.
Applicant's arguments filed 6 November 2025 with regards to the 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the claims, the Applicant argues on page 14 of their response, “In contrast to this guidance, the Office Action highlights most of the claim elements as additional elements. The Office Action argues that the claim elements are not integrated into a practical application other than an abstract idea per se. The Office Action then summarily concludes that the additional elements amount to no more than mere organizing human activity and/or data gathering, and are routine and conventional in the art.” The Applicant continues, “The Office Action is missing the analysis that is spelled out in the memo from August 4, 2025. Namely, the Office Action is silent about how the claim limitations interact and impact each other when evaluating whether the exception is integrated into a practical application. Merely listing the claim elements and then making a subject matter eligibility conclusion is not a sufficient analysis. The memo emphasizes that a "rejection of a claim should not be made simply because an examiner is uncertain as to the claim's eligibility. In order to make a rejection of a claim under any of the statutory bases (i.e., 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103, 112), unpatentability must be established by a preponderance of the evidence." The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s interpretation of the requirements under 35 USC 101, the bounds of the claimed invention, and the grounds of the previous rejection. First, with respect to the Applicant’s argument that, “In contrast to this guidance, the Office Action highlights most of the claim elements as additional elements,” the Examiner is not persuaded. In particular, paragraph 19 of the Non-Final Rejection mailed 6 May 2025 stated, “This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not recite additional elements, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, that improve the functioning of a computer, another technology, or technical field. The claims do not recite the use of, or apply the abstract idea with, a particular machine, the claims do not recite the transformation of an article from one state or thing into another. Finally, the claims do not recite additional elements, taken individually and in an ordered combination, that apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Instead, the claims recite the use of generic computer elements (an interface, a memory device, a processor, user interface, tour operator device, servers) as tools to carry out the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.” As shown here, the Examiner did not “highlights most of the claim elements as additional elements,” as stated by the Applicant, and instead, specifically identified the generic computer elements as reciting an abstract idea. That is, as explained in paragraph 18, almost the entirety of claims 1 and 15 were shown to recite an abstract idea that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” and “Mental Processes” groupings of abstract ideas. With regards to this, the Applicant has provided no rebuttal as to this specific rejection, and instead merely alleged the rejection conducted an analysis that is not supported by the written rejection itself. Second, with regards to the Applicant’s argument that, “The Office Action then summarily concludes that the additional elements amount to no more than mere organizing human activity and/or data gathering, and are routine and conventional in the art,” the Examiner is not persuaded. In this case, as noted above, the Examiner did not summarily conclude that the additional elements amount to no more than mere organizing human activity and/or data gathering; and in fact, data gathering was not recited in the rejection at all, or that the steps/elements are routine and conventional in the art. Thus, the Applicant’s argument is deemed not reflective of the actual cited rejection, and is deemed not persuasive. Third, with respect to the Applicant’s argument that, “the Office Action is silent about how the claim limitations interact and impact each other when evaluating whether the exception is integrated into a practical application,” the Examiner is not persuaded. In this case, it is noted that the August 4, 2025 memorandum states in pages 3 and 4, “Analysis of claim as a whole: The analysis in Step 2A Prong Two considers the claim as a whole. The way in which the additional elements use or interact with the exception may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Accordingly, the additional limitations should not be evaluated in a vacuum, completely separate from the recited judicial exception. Instead, the analysis should take into consideration all the claim limitations and how these limitations interact and impact each other when evaluating whether the exception is integrated into a practical application. While an additional limitation (or combination) that merely applies the judicial exception on a generic computer may not render a claim eligible on its own, an additional limitation (or combination) that meaningfully limits the judicial exception can render it eligible.” (Emphasis added). With regards to this statement, it is noted that MPEP 2106.04(d) sets forth how to conduct the analysis as to determining whether the recited abstract idea is integrated into a practical application. In this case, the showing that the use of generic computer elements as a tool to carry out the abstract idea, is deemed insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or add significantly more to the abstract idea. MPEP 2106.05(f) states, “Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).” (Emphasis added). In this case, the Applicant’s claimed use of generic computer elements (an interface, a memory device, a processor, user interface, tour operator device, servers), does not render the recited abstract idea into a practical application. Additionally, with regards to considering the claim as a whole, it is noted that the rejection specifically did consider the additional elements individually, and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, as shown in the quoted rejection above, and the specific rejection below. Thus, the Examiner notes that the previous rejection satisfied the requirements set forth in the MPEP when making the previous 101 rejection, and additionally, in view of the August memorandum (which it is noted, did not change policy or procedures with regards to analyzing claims under 35 USC 101). Therefore, the Examiner maintains that this rejection is proper.
The Applicant continues on pages 14 and 15 of their response:
“In addition to above, Claims 1 and 15 of the Subject Application recite an improvement over prior art systems by automatically creating contracts to reserve travel resources using predefined contract term parameters in addition to dates selected by a travel/tour operator and corresponding prices specified by a travel resource provider. The system includes a group travel resource contract generation system receives and parses a travel document by city. The group travel resource contract generation system then determines a resource usage date range based on arrival dates and departure dates for each parsed city. Next, the group travel resource contract generation system aggregates the resource usage date ranges for each parsed city. As recited in Claim 1, the group travel resource contract generation system uses the resource usage date ranges for a given city to transmit requests to travel resource providers that specify the resource usage date ranges for the selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges. Responses from the travel resource providers specify an availability or inventory indicator for the number of units needed and a resource rate for the resource usage date ranges. Such information is then used for automatically creating contracts to reserve travel resources using predefined contract term parameters.
The above-technical improvement solves issues identified in paragraphs [0002] and [0003] of Applicant's specification. These known systems are manually managed by tour operators to reserve travel resources, which is inefficient, time-consuming, and prone to errors. The improvement recited in Claims 1 and 15 provides for the automatic transmission of requests to travel resource providers that specify the resource usage date ranges for the selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges based only on a travel document. Selection of travel resources enables the claimed system to then automatically create the contracts for reserving the selected travel resources. As such, present Claims 1 and 15 recite a practical application regarding travel resource management. Accordingly, independent Claims 1 and 15 recite a practical application that is more than a judicial exception, and are in condition for allowance.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s interpretation of the requirements under 35 USC 101, the bounds of the claimed invention, and the grounds of the previous rejection. First, the Examiner notes that the Applicant’s argument fails to identify any specific additional elements in their claim that they allege provide the improvement in computer functionality, another technology or technical field; and instead, has merely provided a general summary of claim 1, with the conclusory statement that the claims, “recite an improvement over prior art systems by automatically creating contracts to reserve travel resources using predefined contract term parameters in addition to dates selected by a travel/tour operator and corresponding prices specified by a travel resource provider.” Notably, “creating contracts to reserve travel resources using predefined contract term parameters in addition to dates selected by a travel/tour operator and corresponding prices specified by a travel resource provider,” would encompass the abstract idea of creating contracts for travel resources (managing commercial activities), and merely doing this in an automated fashion, would merely encompass using generic computer elements as a tool to carry out the abstract idea. Second, the Applicant references paragraphs 2 and 3 of their specification to provide support for the alleged improvement, however these paragraphs do not support the Applicant’s argument. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Applicant’s specification state:
“Fig. 1 shows a known travel resource planning document 10 of a tour operator. The document 10 includes a tour code, a city, an arrival date, a departure date, and a number of rooms needed. Presently, the tour operator has to call or send emails to different lodging providers (and other travel resource providers) in the listed city to determine if there is availability at their property for the specified number of rooms for the specified stay duration. If there is availability, the tour operator receives from the lodging provider a price for each of the specified days. The tour operator may also have to inquire about important contract terms, such as cancellation periods, attrition percentage, comp policy, billing, bed types, parking, and porterage. Further, the tour operator has to take into consideration certain property amenities, such as whether the property has a pool, workout room, distance to certain attractions, meal options, etc. In addition to all of these considerations, the tour operator then has to compare prices, contract terms, and amenities for the available properties to select a desired property for the group tour. In all, this process can take days to weeks depending on the responsiveness of lodging providers and the number of cities/dates for which lodging needs to be reserved.
Even after a property is selected, the tour operator has to request a contract from the lodging provider. As one can appreciate, each lodging provider has their own contract with its own terms and conditions. The tour operator has to ensure the desired contract terms and agreed price are reflected in the contract before signing. The tour operator then has to ensure the lodging provider signs and returns the contract. This signing process can add additional days or weeks to this extremely manual process.” (Emphasis added).
With regards to this argued problem, the specification merely shows that it is a possibility of being time consuming, and not some problem in computer functionality or technology. It is noted that MPEP 2106.05(a) states, “If it is asserted that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. The specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, but it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies a technical problem and explains the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. For example, in McRO, the court relied on the specification’s explanation of how the particular rules recited in the claim enabled the automation of specific animation tasks that previously could only be performed subjectively by humans, when determining that the claims were directed to improvements in computer animation instead of an abstract idea. McRO, 837 F.3d at 1313-14, 120 USPQ2d at 1100-01. In contrast, the court in Affinity Labs of Tex. v. DirecTV, LLC relied on the specification’s failure to provide details regarding the manner in which the invention accomplished the alleged improvement when holding the claimed methods of delivering broadcast content to cellphones ineligible. 838 F.3d 1253, 1263-64, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207-08 (Fed. Cir. 2016).” (Emphasis added). In this case, the Applicant’s specification has not identified a technical problem and did not explain the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. Instead, as noted above, the Applicant’s specification describes a problem in the abstract idea, and not a technical problem and unconventional technical solution. Notably, MPEP 2106.05(a)(I) recites examples that the courts have found to not improve computer functionality, which includes, “Accelerating a process of analyzing audit log data when the increased speed comes solely from the capabilities of a general-purpose computer, FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1095, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1296 (Fed. Cir. 2016).” In this case, merely accelerating the process of contract creation with the use of generic computer elements, is deemed insufficient at showing an improvement in computer functionality. Third, with respect to the Applicant’s argument that, “The improvement recited in Claims 1 and 15 provides for the automatic transmission of requests to travel resource providers that specify the resource usage date ranges for the selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges based only on a travel document. Selection of travel resources enables the claimed system to then automatically create the contracts for reserving the selected travel resources,” the Examiner is not persuaded. As discussed above, the automation of the manual process, and the use of generic computer elements as tools to carry out the abstract idea, are deemed insufficient to integrating the recited abstract idea into a practical application. Additionally, it is noted that MPEP 2106.05(a)(II) states, “Notably, the court did not distinguish between the types of technology when determining the invention improved technology. However, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology. For example, in Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the court determined that the claimed user interface simply provided a trader with more information to facilitate market trades, which improved the business process of market trading but did not improve computers or technology.” (Emphasis added). As shown here, merely improving the business process of contract creation via automatic transmission of requests and selecting travel resources, would merely be improving the recited abstract idea of travel resource searching, booking, and contract creation. Thus, the Applicant has failed to show that the claims recite additional elements that improve the functioning of a computer, another technology, or technical field; and have additionally failed to show that the additional elements in the claims integrate the recited abstract idea into a practical application. Therefore, the Examiner maintains that this rejection is proper.
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 an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite an interface communicatively coupled to a network, the interface configured to receive an electronic travel resource planning document from a tour operator device, the electronic travel resource planning document including cities, arrival dates for the cities, departure dates for the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates; a memory device storing (i) contract term parameters specified by travel resource providers for a respective travel resource, and (ii) a contract template for each travel resource provider specifying the contract term parameters for the respective travel resource; and a processor communicatively coupled to the interface and the memory device, the processor configured to: receive the electronic travel resource planning document, the electronic travel resource planning document including a plurality of cities, corresponding arrival dates and departure dates for each of the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates; parse the electronic travel resource planning document by the cities; determine a resource usage date range based on the arrival dates and the departure dates for each parsed city; aggregate the resource usage date ranges for each parsed city; select or receive a selection of one of the parsed cities; transmit a request message to one or more servers of the travel resource providers specifying the resource usage date ranges for the selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges; receive response message from the one or more servers, each response message being for a particular travel resource and specifying an availability or inventory indicator for the number of units needed and a resource rate for the resource usage date ranges; determine travel resources that have availability or inventory for at least one of the resource usage date ranges based on the availability or inventory indicator; for each of the travel resources with at least availability or inventory, obtain travel resource information related to the travel resource including text and graphics; for the travel resources with at least availability or inventory, cause the obtained travel resource information to be displayed in a user interface of the tour operator device in conjunction with indicators of availability for each of the resource usage date ranges and the resource rate for each of the resource usage date ranges; receive a selection of at least one resource usage date range for one of the displayed travel resources from the tour operator device via the network; select the contract template that corresponds to the selected travel resource; edit the contract template to create a complete contract file by adding the selected at least one resource usage date range, the number of units, and the corresponding resource rate; cause the complete contract file to be displayed via the user interface of the tour operator device; receive from the tour operator device via the network the complete contract file with an electronic signature; and store the complete contract file with the electronic signature to the memory device and transmit the complete contract file with the electronic signature to the server of the selected travel resource for a counter-signature.
The limitations of storing contract term parameters specified by travel resource providers for a travel resource and a contract template for each travel resource provider specifying the contract term parameters; receiving the travel resource planning document including a plurality of cities, corresponding arrival dates and departure dates for each of the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates; parsing the travel resource planning document by the cities; determining a resource usage date range based on the arrival dates and the departure dates for each parsed city; aggregating the resource usage date ranges for each parsed city; selecting one of the parsed cities; transmitting a request message to the travel resource providers specifying the resource usage date ranges for the selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges; receiving response message being for a particular travel resource and specifying an availability or inventory indicator for the number of units needed and a resource rate for the resource usage date ranges; determining travel resources that have availability or inventory for at least one of the resource usage date ranges based on the availability or inventory indicator; obtaining travel resource information related to the travel resource including text and graphics; displaying the obtained travel resource information in conjunction with indicators of availability for each of the resource usage date ranges and the resource rate for each of the resource usage date ranges; receiving a selection of a resource usage date range for one of the travel resources; selecting the contract template that corresponds to the selected travel resource; editing the contract template to create a complete contract file by adding the selected at least one resource usage date range, the number of units, and the corresponding resource rate; displaying the complete contract file; receiving an electronic signature; and storing the complete contract file with the electronic signature and transmitting the complete contract file with the electronic signature to the supplier for a counter-signature; as drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, encompasses the management of commercial activities (business relations, sales activities), managing human behavior or relationships, and the performance of mental processes. That is, other than reciting the use of generic computer elements (an interface, a memory device, a processor, user interface, tour operator device, servers), the claims recite an abstract idea. In this case, storing contract term parameters specified by travel resource providers for a travel resource and a contract template for each travel resource provider specifying the contract term parameters; encompasses managing business relations and sales activities by storing contract information for services. In addition, receiving the travel resource planning document including a plurality of cities, corresponding arrival dates and departure dates for each of the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates; parsing the travel resource planning document by the cities; determining a resource usage date range based on the arrival dates and the departure dates for each parsed city; aggregating the resource usage date ranges for each parsed city; selecting one of the parsed cities; transmitting a request message to the travel resource providers specifying the resource usage date ranges for the selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges; receiving response message being for a particular travel resource and specifying an availability or inventory indicator for the number of units needed and a resource rate for the resource usage date ranges; determining travel resources that have availability or inventory for at least one of the resource usage date ranges based on the availability or inventory indicator; obtaining travel resource information related to the travel resource including text and graphics; encompasses receiving travel planning requests, wherein the travel is for a group trip with trip details, and wherein the details are analyzed and provided to suppliers in order to determine availability of resources; which is the management of commercial activity (sales activities, business relations), and managing human behavior or relationships. In addition, displaying the obtained travel resource information in conjunction with indicators of availability for each of the resource usage date ranges and the resource rate for each of the resource usage date ranges; receiving a selection of a resource usage date range for one of the travel resources; selecting the contract template that corresponds to the selected travel resource; editing the contract template to create a complete contract file by adding the selected at least one resource usage date range, the number of units, and the corresponding resource rate; displaying the complete contract file; receiving an electronic signature; and storing the complete contract file with the electronic signature and transmitting the complete contract file with the electronic signature to the supplier for a counter-signature; encompasses informing customers and planners of a proposed trip plan, forming a contract with the details for the trip plan, and receiving signatures in order to form a contractual relationship; which is the management of commercial activity (sales activities, business relations), and managing human behavior or relationships. Thus, the claims recite elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. In addition, the claims recite storing contract term parameters specified by travel resource providers for a travel resource and a contract template for each travel resource provider specifying the contract term parameters; which encompass elements that can be performed in the human mind (observation, memorization). In addition, the claims further recite receiving the travel resource planning document, parsing the travel resource planning document by the cities, determining a resource usage date range based on the arrival dates and the departure dates for each parsed city, aggregating the resource usage date ranges for each parsed city, and selecting one of the parsed cities; encompass elements that can be performed in the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement). In addition, the claims further recite determining travel resources that have availability or inventory for at least one of the resource usage date ranges, obtaining travel resource information related to the travel resource, receiving a selection of a resource usage date range for one of the travel resources, selecting the contract template that corresponds to the selected travel resource, and editing the contract template to create a complete contract file; encompass elements that can be performed in the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement). Thus, the claims recite elements that fall into the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not recite additional elements, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, that improve the functioning of a computer, another technology, or technical field. The claims do not recite the use of, or apply the abstract idea with, a particular machine, the claims do not recite the transformation of an article from one state or thing into another. Finally, the claims do not recite additional elements, taken individually and in an ordered combination, that apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Instead, the claims recite the use of generic computer elements (an interface, a memory device, a processor, user interface, tour operator device, servers) as tools to carry out the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, 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 using generic computer elements and machines to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are directed to non-patent eligible subject matter.
The dependent claims 2-14 and 16-20, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, do not recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or add significantly more to the abstract idea. In particular, the claims further recite displaying contract term parameters, receiving a selection of parameters, filtering resources that include the parameters, and displaying resources; which further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas (claims 2 and 16). In addition, the claims further recite calculating and providing a resource rate for a resource; which further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas (claims 3 and 17). In addition, the claims further recite receiving completed contracts with signatures form parties, storing the contracts, and providing an indication of a reservation; which further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas (claims 4 and 18). In addition, the claims further recite removing a resource from availability when booked, and displaying available resources; which further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas (claims 5 and 19). In addition, the claims further recite ordering travel resources on a display based on pricing or availability; which further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas (claims 6 and 20). In addition, the claims further recite the types of units needed, resource information, and contract term parameters, which further defines the field of use, and thus does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or add significantly more to the abstract idea (claims 7-9). In addition, the claims further recite conducting a second recite for a different group trip, and repeat the process of claim 1; which thus further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships, and mental steps; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” and “Mental Processes” groupings of abstract ideas, for the same reason as discussed with respect to claim 1 (claim 10). In addition, the claims further recite transmitting a messages to lock in a resource; which encompasses booking a reservation, and therefore further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas (claims 11 and 12). I addition, the claims further recite starting a timer when a contract file is transmitted to a server, determining that it has not received a counter signature within some time period, and providing a reminder to respond; which encompasses forming a contractual relationship, and therefore further recites the abstract idea of managing commercial interactions (business relations and sales activities), and managing human behavior or relationships; and thus, further recites elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas (claims 13 and 14).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vavul (US 2005/0033616 A1) (hereinafter Vavul), in view of Singh (US 2018/0308016 A1) (hereinafter Singh), and further in view of Amzallag et al. (US 2017/0316524 A1) (hereinafter Amzallag).
With respect to claims 1 and 15, Vavul teaches:
An interface communicatively coupled to a network, the interface configured to receive an electronic travel resource planning document from a tour operator device, the electronic travel resource planning document including cities, arrival dates for the cities, departure dates for the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates (See at least paragraphs 36, 40-43, 56, 76, 77, 79, 82, 93, 114, and 115 which describe a system for searching for group trip resources used for a travel package, wherein the system receives search parameters for the trip, including destination locations, travel dates, and the number of travelers in a group).
A processor communicatively coupled to the interface and the memory device, the processor configured to: receive the electronic travel resource planning document, the electronic travel resource planning document including a destination, corresponding arrival dates and departure dates for each of the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates (See at least paragraphs 36, 40-43, 56, 76, 77, 79, 82, 93, 114, and 115 which describe a system for searching for group trip resources used for a travel package, wherein the system receives search parameters for the trip, including destination locations, travel dates, and the number of travelers in a group that will need some accommodation).
Parse the electronic travel resource planning document by the cities, Determine a resource usage date range based on the arrival dates and the departure dates for each parsed city, Aggregate the resource usage date ranges for each parsed city, Select or receive a selection of one of the parsed cities (See at least paragraphs 36, 40-43, 56, 76, 77, 79, 82, 93, 114-119 which describe a system for searching for group trip resources used for a travel package, wherein the system receives search parameters for the trip, including destination locations, travel dates, and the number of travelers in a group that will need some accommodation; and wherein the system parses the request to identify the parameters and sources of information, such as GDS’s and custom databases, to identify locations with the requested resources for the available date range).
Select the contract template that corresponds to the selected travel resource; Edit the contract template to create a complete contract file by adding the selected at least one resource usage date range, the number of units, and the corresponding resource rate, Cause the complete contract file to be displayed via the user interface of the tour operator device, Receive from the tour operator device via the network the complete contract file with an electronic signature, and Store the complete contract file with the electronic signature to the memory device (See at least paragraphs 36, 37, 72, 76, 82, 84, 89, 94, 104-106, 109-111, and 119 which describes forming a travel package that includes multiple resources, wherein group customers are able to review the packages, and wherein the customers can select, pay for, and reserve a package and its included resources, including providing an indicator of the booking).
Vavul discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15 as stated above. Vavul does not explicitly disclose the following, however Singh teaches:
A processor communicatively coupled to the interface and the memory device, the processor configured to: receive the electronic travel resource planning document, the electronic travel resource planning document including a plurality of cities, corresponding arrival dates and departure dates for each of the cities, and a number of units needed for the arrival and departure dates (See at least paragraphs 3, 4, 21, 22, 52, 53, 76, 77, and 80 which describe providing a system with user preferences for travel packages, wherein the preferences include destination cities, travel dates, and the number of units needed).
Transmit a request message to one or more servers of the travel resource providers specifying the resource usage date ranges for the selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges; Receive response message from the one or more servers, each response message being for a particular travel resource and specifying an availability or inventory indicator for the number of units needed and a resource rate for the resource usage date ranges; Determine travel resources that have availability or inventory for at least one of the resource usage date ranges based on the availability or inventory indicator; For each of the travel resources with at least availability or inventory, obtain travel resource information related to the travel resource including text and graphics (See at least paragraphs 3, 4, 21-23, 52, 55, 57, 59, 60, 62, 66, 71-76, 82, and figures 6A-7C which describe querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures).
For the travel resources with at least availability or inventory, cause the obtained travel resource information to be displayed in a user interface of the tour operator device in conjunction with indicators of availability for each of the resource usage date ranges and the resource rate for each of the resource usage date ranges, Receive a selection of at least one resource usage date range for one of the displayed travel resources from the tour operator device via the network (See at least paragraphs 3, 4, 21-23, 52, 55, 57, 59, 60, 62, 66, 71-76, 82, and figures 6A-7C which describe querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages of Singh. By requesting available travel resource inventory from suppliers in cities, in order to form travel packages including available inventory, and wherein the resource details are provided on a planner’s device, a travel management system will predictably be able to generate group travel packages for users, wherein the packages only include available resources, which would predictably reduce the likelihood of cancellations or refunds due to failure to provide purchased resources.
The combination of Vavul and Singh disclose all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15 as stated above. Vavul and Singh do not explicitly disclose the following, however Amzallag teaches:
A memory device storing (i) contract term parameters specified by travel resource providers for a respective travel resource, and (ii) a contract template for each travel resource provider specifying the contract term parameters for the respective travel resource; Cause the complete contract file to be displayed via the user interface of the tour operator device; Receive from the tour operator device via the network the complete contract file with an electronic signature, and Store the complete contract file with the electronic signature to the memory device and transmit the complete contract file with the electronic signature to the server of the selected travel resource for a counter-signature (See at least paragraphs 12, 35-38, and 42-44 which describe a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag. By forming contracts for travels packages, wherein the contracts are signed by each party, a travel management system will predictably be able to ensure all parties agree to a booking with a legal contract, thus preventing fraudulent activities. In addition, by using contract templates to form travel packages, a travel manager will predictably be able to ensure that all of the details needed for each type of travel package are particularly gathered and filled in with the package.
With respect to claims 2 and 16, the combination of Vavul, Singh, and Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15 as stated above. In addition, Vavul teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to: display a list of available contract term parameters within the user interface; receive a selection of one of the available contract term parameters; filter the travel resources with at least availability or inventory that include the selected contract term parameter within the corresponding contract template; and cause the travel resource information for the filtered travel resources to be displayed in the user interface of the tour operator device in conjunction with indicators of availability for each of the resource usage date ranges and the resource rate for each of the resource usage date ranges (See at least paragraphs 72, 76, 77, 79, 82, 88, 93, 94, 112, and 114-119 which describe searching for travel resources from information sources, wherein available resources are provided to a travel planners device in order to create travel packages, wherein the results are filtered based on availability and specific parameters, such as type of resource or a theme).
With respect to claims 3 and 17, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15 as stated above. In addition, Vavul teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to: after receiving the selection of the at least one resource usage date range for one of the displayed travel resources, calculate a new resource rate for the selected at least one resource usage date range; and display the new resource rate within the user interface in relation to the travel resource for the selected at least one resource usage date range (See at least paragraphs 7, 36, 48, 72, 76, 79, 112, and figures 11 and 12 which describe calculating a resource cost for selected resources in a travel package and presenting the cost to a tour planner).
With respect to claims 4 and 18, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15 as stated above. In addition, Amzallag teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to: receive the compete contract with the counter-signature from the server of the selected travel resource; store the compete contract with the counter-signature to the memory device; and provide an indication that the at least one resource usage date range for the corresponding city is reserved See at least paragraphs 12, 35-38, and 42-44 which describe a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag. By forming contracts for travels packages, wherein the contracts are signed by each party, a travel management system will predictably be able to ensure all parties agree to a booking with a legal contract, thus preventing fraudulent activities. In addition, by using contract templates to form travel packages, a travel manager will predictably be able to ensure that all of the details needed for each type of travel package are particularly gathered and filled in with the package.
With respect to claims 5 and 19, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15 as stated above. In addition, Singh teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to: after the compete contract with the electronic signature is transmitted to the server of the selected travel resource, remove the at least one resource usage date range; and for the travel resources with at least availability or inventory, cause the obtained travel resource information to be displayed in a user interface of the tour operator device in conjunction with indicators of availability for each of the resource usage date ranges and the resource rate for each of the resource usage date ranges excluding the removed the at least one resource usage date range (See at least paragraphs 3, 4, 21, 30, 52, 58, 60, 62, and 82 which describe presenting travel packages for users, wherein once has been selected, book the associated services, and wherein packages that are booked are removed from inventory).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages, and wherein once has been selected and booked, packages that are booked are removed from inventory of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag.By removing booked packages and resources from a travel inventory, a travel management system would predictably prevent double booking or double purchasing by different groups of people, thus preventing users from paying for unavailable services.
With respect to claims 6 and 20, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 15 as stated above. In addition, Singh teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to order the travel resources for display within the user interface based on at least one of greatest amount of availability or inventory or an average resource rate for the resource usage date ranges with availability (See at least paragraphs 21-23, 25, 29, 30, 57, 78, 79, 82-85, and 87 which describe the travel packages being created and modified based on user trends, user observational data, and pricing, wherein packages are displayed on a tour planners device, and can be removed based on the determined probability of booking, including based on pricing).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages, and wherein the travel packages being created and modified based on user trends, user observational data, and pricing, wherein packages are displayed on a tour planners device, and can be removed based on the determined probability of booking, including based on pricing of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag. By ordering packages on a tour planner’s device, such that packages with higher probability of booking are displayed while lower probability packages are removed, a tour planner will predictably be able to browse and select only those plans that yield likely final sales, thus increasing the chance of a successful sale.
With respect to claim 7, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. In addition, Vavul teaches:
Wherein the number of units needed is a number of rooms needed and the travel resource is a hotel or other lodging property (See at least paragraphs 36, 76, 79, 81, 93, 114, and 115 which describe searching using parameters for travel resources that will be included in a travel package, wherein the search parameters include a number of hotel rooms for a number of travelers).
With respect to claim 8, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. In addition, Vavul teaches:
Wherein the travel resource information includes at least one of available amenities, a rating, a description, or one or more pictures related to the travel resource (See at least paragraphs 36, 40, 76, 77, 89, 93, and 114 which describe travel resource information that is searched for as including descriptions of the resources).
With respect to claim 9, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. In addition, Singh teaches:
Wherein the contract term parameters include at least one of a cancellation period, an attrition percentage, a comp policy, a billing policy, a bed type, a parking policy, and a porterage policy (See at least paragraphs 3, 4, 55, 57, and 63 which describe the contract parameters including a bed type and particular details regarding resources).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages, and wherein the contract parameters including a bed type and particular details regarding resources of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag. By including contract parameters, such as bed types for resources booked, a travel manager would predictably be able to ensure customers receive items they included in a package via contracts, and ensure that customers can get items that they desire, thus increasing the likelihood of successful sales.
With respect to claim 10, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. In addition, Vavul teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to: after the compete contract with the electronic signature is transmitted to the server of the selected travel resource, select or receive a selection of another one of the parsed cities (See at least paragraphs 36, 40-43, 56, 76, 77, 79, 82, 93, 114, and 115 which describe a system for searching for group trip resources used for a travel package, wherein the system receives search parameters for the trip, including destination locations, travel dates, and the number of travelers in a group that will need some accommodation).
Select the contract template that corresponds to the selected second travel resource; Edit the contract template to create a complete second contract file by adding the selected at least one resource usage date range and the corresponding resource rate; Cause the complete second contract file to be displayed via the user interface of the tour operator device; Receive from the tour operator device via the network the compete second contract file with an electronic signature; and Store the compete second contract file with the electronic signature to the memory device (See at least paragraphs 36, 37, 72, 76, 82, 84, 89, 94, 104-106, 109-111, and 119 which describes forming a travel package that includes multiple resources, wherein group customers are able to review the packages, and wherein the customers can select, pay for, and reserve a package and its included resources, including providing an indicator of the booking).
Vavul discloses all of the limitations of claim 10 as stated above. Vavul does not explicitly disclose the following, however Singh teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to: after the compete contract with the electronic signature is transmitted to the server of the selected travel resource, select or receive a selection of another one of the parsed cities; Transmit a second request message to the one or more servers of the travel resource providers specifying the resource usage date ranges for the other selected parsed city and the corresponding number of units needed for the resource usage date ranges; Receive second response messages from the one or more servers, each second response message being for a particular travel resource and specifying an availability or inventory indicator for the number of units needed and a resource rate for the resource usage date range; Determine second travel resources that have availability or inventory for at least one of the resource usage date ranges based on the availability or inventory indicator; For each of the second travel resources with at least availability or inventory, obtain second travel resource information related to the second travel resource including text and graphics (See at least paragraphs 3, 4, 21-23, 52, 55, 57, 59, 60, 62, 66, 71-76, 82, and figures 6A-7C which describe querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures).
For the second travel resources with at least availability or inventory, cause the obtained second travel resource information to be displayed in the user interface of the tour operator device in conjunction with indicators of availability for each of the resource usage date ranges and the resource rate for each of the resource usage date ranges; Receive a selection of at least one resource usage date range for one of the displayed second travel resource from the tour operator device via the network (See at least paragraphs 3, 4, 21-23, 52, 55, 57, 59, 60, 62, 66, 71-76, 82, and figures 6A-7C which describe querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag. By requesting available travel resource inventory from suppliers in cities, in order to form travel packages including available inventory, and wherein the resource details are provided on a planner’s device, a travel management system will predictably be able to generate group travel packages for users, wherein the packages only include available resources, which would predictably reduce the likelihood of cancellations or refunds due to failure to provide purchased resources.
The combination of Vavul and Singh disclose all of the limitations of claim 10 as stated above. Vavul and Singh do not explicitly disclose the following, however Amzallag teaches:
Select the contract template that corresponds to the selected second travel resource; Edit the contract template to create a complete second contract file by adding the selected at least one resource usage date range and the corresponding resource rate; Cause the complete second contract file to be displayed via the user interface of the tour operator device; Receive from the tour operator device via the network the compete second contract file with an electronic signature; and Store the compete second contract file with the electronic signature to the memory device and transmit the compete second contract with file the electronic signature to the server of the selected second travel resource for a counter-signature (See at least paragraphs 12, 35-38, and 42-44 which describe a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag. By forming contracts for travels packages, wherein the contracts are signed by each party, a travel management system will predictably be able to ensure all parties agree to a booking with a legal contract, thus preventing fraudulent activities. In addition, by using contract templates to form travel packages, a travel manager will predictably be able to ensure that all of the details needed for each type of travel package are particularly gathered and filled in with the package.
With respect to claim 11, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. In addition, Vavul teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to transmit a reservation message to the server of the selected travel resource to lock in the specified number of units for the selected at least one resource usage date range (See at least paragraphs 76, 77, 89, 104-106, and 109-111 which describe allowing a user to book travel packages via the travel manager and providing the reservations to the suppliers, and wherein the reservation includes the number of travelers and resources needed).
With respect to claim 12, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. In addition, Vavul teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to transmit a separate request message to the one or more servers of the travel resource providers for each separate resource usage date range (See at least paragraphs 36, 56, 76, 81, 82, 84, 93, and 116-118 which describe transmitting requests to different suppliers and sources in parallel, wherein the requests include travel services in a travel time period).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vavul, Singh, and Amzallag as applied to claim 1 as stated above, and further in view of Relova (US 2018/0285990 A1) (hereinafter Relova).
With respect to claim 13, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as stated above. Vavul, Singh, and Amzallag do not explicitly disclose the following, however Relova teaches:
Wherein the processor is further configured to: start a timer when the compete contract file with the electronic signature is transmitted to the server of the selected travel resource for the counter-signature; determine the compete contract file with the counter-signature has not been returned when the timer reaches a threshold; and transmit a reminder message to the server of the selected travel resource (See at least paragraph 56 which describes a user signing a contract for a service, wherein the contract is sent to a supplier to counter-sign and a timer is started for them to sign it, wherein a reminder message is sent if the supplier does not respond with the timer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag, with the system and method of a user signing a contract for a service, wherein the contract is sent to a supplier to counter-sign and a timer is started for them to sign it, wherein a reminder message is sent if the supplier does not respond with the timer of Revola. By using a timer for a supplier to respond to a signature of a contract before reminding them of the request to sign, a travel planner would predictably be able to ensure that suppliers do not forget to sign a contract, and thus, predictably ensure that customers receive services that they pay for when booking.
With respect to claim 14, Vavul/Singh/Amzallag/Relova discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 13 as stated above. In addition, Relova teaches:
Wherein the threshold is a time duration between one hour and one week (See at least paragraph 56 which describes a user signing a contract for a service, wherein the contract is sent to a supplier to counter-sign and a timer is started for them to sign it, wherein a reminder message is sent if the supplier does not respond with the timer, and wherein the timer can be 45 minutes or 3 hours).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the to combine the system and method of creating tourism packages via requesting travel resources in a city for period of travel, wherein the planner provides a request which is parsed and analyzed to identify particular details requested, and upon receiving responses, a reservation contract is formed for the travel package of Vavul, with the system and method of querying service providers for resources available in a location for a travel period, wherein the providers provide the results to the travel system, which include travel resource details, includes text and pictures, and wherein the information is presented on a user interface of a tour planner in order to generate tourism packages of Singh, with the system and method of a tourism planner contacting resource suppliers in cities to generate an inventory of travel resources for tourism packages it plans on creating, wherein the tourism planner stores contract templates which are filled with selected resources, receives contract signatures for the packages, and provides the contracts to the suppliers for agreeing to the bookings of Amzallag, with the system and method of a user signing a contract for a service, wherein the contract is sent to a supplier to counter-sign and a timer is started for them to sign it, wherein a reminder message is sent if the supplier does not respond with the timer of Revola. By using a timer for a supplier to respond to a signature of a contract before reminding them of the request to sign, a travel planner would predictably be able to ensure that suppliers do not forget to sign a contract, and thus, predictably ensure that customers receive services that they pay for when booking.
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 MICHAEL P HARRINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1365. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5.
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, Jeffrey Zimmerman can be reached on (571) 272-4602. 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.
Michael Harrington
Primary Patent Examiner
16 January 2026
Art Unit 3628
/MICHAEL P HARRINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628