DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This communication is a Final Action for Application 18/768,350. In response to Examiner’s action mail dated September 10, 2025, Applicant submitted amendments and arguments that are mail dated February 10, 2026. Claims 2, 5, 9, 12, 16, and 19 are cancelled. Claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 10, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
Standards for drawings are described under 37 CFR 1.84 (a). There are two acceptable categories for presenting drawings in utility and design applications.(1) Black ink. Black and white drawings are normally required. (2) Color. Color drawings are permitted in design applications. Figure 4 and Figure 6, are gray scale and should be submitted so that all details in the drawings are reproducible in black and white. See MPEP 608.02 Section V.
Response to Amendments
Claims 1-20 is/are pending in this application. The claim(s) 1,8, and 14 are amended.
Drawings. Applicant submitted amended drawings for Figure 4 and 6. The drawings are grayscale. The drawings remain objected because the Figures 4 and 6 submitted on mail date February 10, 2026 are grayscale.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection. The claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, see below.
Regarding the pending 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection. The Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 are not persuasive. Please see the prior art rejection below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on February 10, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and/or are moot in view of the revised rejections. Applicant’s arguments will be addressed herein below.
Replacement Drawings
On page 8 of the Applicant’s 35 arguments, Applicant submitted replacement sheets for FIGS. 4 and 6 for entry and consideration.
Examiner has not entered the replacement drawings. The drawings are grayscale. The drawings remain objected because the Figures 4 and 6 submitted on mail date February 10, 2026 are grayscale.
Claim Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 101
On pages 9-12 of the Applicant’s 35 U.S.C. 101 arguments, Applicant traverses the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-20 being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Applicant respectfully submits the amended claim 1 (and similarly claims 8 and 15) recite subject matter that is not directed to an abstract idea, that is integrated into a practical application, and that adds significantly more to the alleged abstract idea by providing technical improvements, and thus the claims recite patentable eligible subject matter.
On pages 9-10, Applicant submits the amendments do not reasonably amount to certain methods of organizing human activity -managing personal behavior.
On pages 10-11 Applicant submits the claims are integrated into a practical application. The amended features of error notification and geolocation do not merely provide for the claims as merely generating an appointment, but also implementing verification based on geolocation information. The amended claims dynamically adjust a time sheet, as such, is a meaningful limit on practicing the alleged abstract idea as recited in the independent claim.
On pages 11-12, Applicant submits when the claims are viewed as an ordered combination and as a whole, they recite significantly more than the alleged abstract idea. The amended features do not constitute well-understood, routine, or conventional activity in the field. Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that amended independent claim 1, 8 and 15 recite subject matter that integrates the alleged abstract idea into a practical application.
Applicant request the withdrawal of the rejection and a timely notice of allowance.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s 35 U.S.C. 101 arguments. The Applicant’s claims are analyzed in light of MPEP 2103-2106. Claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 in view of the claims limitations, are related to the abstract idea of matching people who need help with people who can provide that help which is a mental concept. Furthermore, the claims record/verify work time using geolocation-aware clock-in/clock-out events which are mathematical concepts. The claims recite mental concepts and mathematical concepts and therefore recite abstract concepts. The claims are directed to a judicial exception under Step 2A prong one.
At Step 2A prong two, the claims are do not integrated the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims broadly claim additional elements (e.g. processor, memory, first device, second device, a digital timer, and a global position in system). As recited, the additional elements are adding the words apply it (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception and merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Although Applicant added the additional elements, a digital timer and a global position in system, to the claims the limitations describe the use of the elements to achieve the abstract idea of matching profiles, initiating communications between the profiles, generating an appointment, recording timestamps at a geo-location. These steps can be performed without the use of a computer. Since the abstract idea can be completed without a computer, the claims are not merely abstract concepts that are using a computer, and therefore, are not integrated into a practical application at Step 2A prong two.
Furthermore, the claims do not recite an improvement in technology. The claims broadly recite matching profiles, communicating between two profiles, and tracking time. Since the abstract idea can be completed by two people having a person-to-person conversation along with using a watch, pen, and paper to record time, the claims are not rooted an improvement to technology. Therefore, the claims are not integrated into a practical application at Step 2A prong two.
At Step 2B, the claims when considered as a whole, that are using a computer elements to achieve the abstract idea of matching profiles, initiating communications between the profiles, generating an appointment, recording timestamps at a geo-location. The claims do not pertain to an improvement in the functioning of the computer or any other technology or technical field The claims itself do not reflect an improvement in technology. Applicant is encouraged to point Examiner to the embodiment within the specification that may have a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention in the specification.
The Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. The pending claims are not patent eligible. The claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101,see below.
Claim Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 103
On pages 12-14 of the Applicant’s 35 U.S.C. 103 arguments, Applicant traverses the prior art Malik in view of Rathod fails to disclose the amended claim features for claim 1 (and similarly claims 8 and 15). Applicant request withdrawal if the rejection and timely notice of allowance.
The Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. The Applicant’s amendments necessitate grounds for a new rejection. The claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103, see below.
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, 3-4,6-7 is/are process.
Claims 8, 10-11, 13-14 machine.
Claims 15, 17-18, 20 is/are manufacture.
The claims (claim 8, similarly claim 1 and claim 15) recite receive profile information; generate one or more profiles based on the profile information;
identify one or more profile matches based on the one or more profiles;
initiate, between … wherein the first user and the second user communicate with each other in the real-time communication session … to generate an appointment:
generate [[an]]the appointment to perform one or more tasks based on the one or more profile matches; record, … , a clock-in timestamp information and a clock-out timestamp information associated with the appointment to perform the one or more tasks, wherein the clock- in timestamp information and the clock-out timestamp information are verified against geolocation information of the … associated with the second user; receive an error notification in response to not receiving a selection to clock out … associated with the second user; dynamically adjust a time sheet to reflect an actual amount of time in performing the one or more tasks in response to receiving the error notification; extract, … , the geolocation information…; and verify, in real-time, … associated with the second user against the geolocation of the second device at the time of clock-in timestamp information and clock-out timestamp information. Claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 in view of the claim limitations, recites the abstract idea of matching profiles, initiating communications between the profiles, generating an appointment, recording timestamps at a geo-location. These limitations are identify one or more profile matches based on the one or more profiles and initiating communications, and thus, are certain methods of organizing human activity-managing personal behavior. Furthermore, the claims record a clock-in timestamp information and a clock-out timestamp information associated with the appointment to perform the one or more tasks and adjusting timesheets, and thus, the claims are directed to mathematical concepts. Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract concept at step 2A prong one.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application under the second prong of Step 2A Prong 2. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements beyond the recited abstract idea of, “a first device associated with a first user and a second device associated with a second user, a real-time communication session by signaling a virtual wave gesture transmitted from the first device to the second device,” “via the respective first device and the second device”, “via a digital timer”, “via a global positioning system”, “of the second device”, in claim 1; “An application system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: ”, “a first device associated with a first user and a second device associated with a second user, a real-time communication session by signaling a virtual wave gesture transmitted from the first device to the second device,” “via the respective first device and the second device”, “via a digital timer”, “via a global positioning system”, “of the second device”, in claim 8; “A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising”, “a first device associated with a first user and a second device associated with a second user, a real-time communication session by signaling a virtual wave gesture transmitted from the first device to the second device,” “via the respective first device and the second device”, “via a digital timer”, “via a global positioning system”, “of the second device”, in claim 15; however, when viewed as an ordered combination, and pursuant to the broadest reasonable interpretation, each of the additional elements are computing elements recite adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP 2106.05 (f).
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims also fails to recite any improvements to another technology or technical field, improvements to the functioning of the computer itself.
Furthermore, the claims do not recite an improvement in technology. The claims broadly recite matching profiles, communicating between two profiles, and tracking time. Since the abstract idea can be completed by two people having a person-to-person conversation along with using a watch, pen, and paper to record time, the claims are not rooted an improvement to technology. Therefore, the claims are not integrated into a practical application at Step 2A prong two.
At Step 2B, the claims when considered as a whole, that are using a computer elements to achieve the abstract idea of matching profiles, initiating communications between the profiles, generating an appointment, recording timestamps at a geo-location. The claims do not pertain to an improvement in the functioning of the computer or any other technology or technical field The claims itself do not reflect an improvement in technology. Applicant is encouraged to point Examiner to the embodiment within the specification that may have a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention in the specification.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more. (See MPEP 2106.05 (f) – mere instructions to Apply an Exception.
At step 2B, it is MPEP 2106.05 (d) – Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information).
Dependent claims 3-4,6-7 further narrow the abstract idea of independent claim 1. Dependent claims 10-11, 13-14 further narrow the abstract idea of independent claim 8. Dependent claims 15, 17-18, 20 further narrow the abstract idea of independent claim 15. The claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 are not patent eligible.
Moreover, aside from the aforementioned additional elements, the remaining elements of dependent claims 3-4,6-7 & 10-11, 13-14 & 15, 17-18, 20 do not transform the recited abstract idea into a patent eligible invention because these claims merely recite further limitations that provide no more than simply narrowing the recited abstract idea.
Since there are no limitations in these claims that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that these claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, claims 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4,6-8,10-11,13-15,17-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malik (US 2012/0,149,397 A1) in view of Rathod (WO 2016/113602 A1) and Dhebar (US 11,631,054 B1).
Regarding Claim 8, [and similarly claim 1 and claim 15] (Currently Amended)
An application system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more memories, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: receive profile information; generate one or more profiles based on the profile information; identify one or more profile matches based on the one or more profiles;
Malik [024] discloses FIG. 1 is an exemplary embodiment of a network configuration, which may be utilized in facilitating communications among users., Malik [024], [Figure 1]; Malik [030] discloses The local interface 292 may have additional elements, …, such as controllers, buffers (caches), drivers, repeaters, and receivers to enable communications.; Malik [030], [Figure 2].
Malik [066] discloses by subscribing to an interest group, alerts may be sent to other users of the same interest group, when located in a predefined zone., Malik [066].
…
generate the appointment to perform one or more tasks based on the one or more profile matches;
Malik [065] discloses Instant Message to all of those buddies, with … messages may be sent such that if the user is meeting at Chastain Memorial Park at 2:00, a message can be sent to any buddy that enters the corresponding zone prior to 2:00., Malik [065].
Record, … , a clock-in timestamp information and a clock-out timestamp information associated with the appointment to perform the one or more tasks, wherein the clock-in timestamp information and the clock-out timestamp information are verified against geolocation information of the second device associated with the second user.
Malik [065] discloses Instant Message to all of those buddies, with … messages may be sent such that if the user is meeting at Chastain Memorial Park at 2:00, a message can be sent to any buddy that enters the corresponding zone prior to 2:00., Malik [065], [Figure 2]
PNG
media_image1.png
584
767
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Malik Figure 9 illustrates timestamps.
PNG
media_image2.png
576
740
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Rathod further teaches:
timestamps
Rathod [p. 38 lines 7-9] disclose system monitors, tracks, stores & updates online status and available status with date & timestamp and waiting time duration to identify who is online and available first and rank service providers e.g. cab drivers as per waiting time of looking for prospective customers.
Malik teaches determining a geographic zone for monitoring and receiving data related to a contact of a user entering the geographic zone. Rathod teaches real time present or show & update listed on demand service providers. It would have been obvious to combine before the effective filing date, using instant messaging protocol to monitor that at least one other user may be a stationary zone and/or a moving zone, as taught by Malik, with matching a ranking service provider, as taught by Rathod, so online users can match, select, and identify, send or accept request for service providers., Rathod [abstract]
Although highly suggested by Malik, Dhebar teaches:
… initiate, between a first device associated with a first user and a second device associated with a second user, a real-time communication session by signaling a virtual wave gesture transmitted from the first device to the second device, wherein the first user and the second user communicate with each other in the real-time communication session via the respective first device and the second device to generate an appointment …
record, via a digital timer
the second device associated with the second user; receive an error notification in response to not receiving a selection to clock out via the second device associated with the second user; dynamically adjust a time sheet to reflect an actual amount of time in performing the one or more tasks in response to receiving the error notification; extract, via a global positioning system, the geolocation information of the second device; and verify, in real-time, a location of the second device associated with the second user against the geolocation of the second device at the time of clock-in timestamp information and clock-out timestamp information.
Dhebar [abstract] [Figure 3], [column 8 lines 60-67] –[column 11 line 1-55] teaches time tracking activities. An activity indicator for a user is received by a computing device. The current status and the current schedule of the user are obtained. A determination can then be made that the current status of the user is incorrect based at least in part on a comparison between the activity indicator and the current schedule of the user. In response, the current status of the user can be corrected.; Dhebar teaches correction [column 11 lines 55-57], [column 6 lines 57-68] If the client device 103 is being used during a time that the schedule 236 for the user 101 indicates that the user 101 is expected to be working, but the time-clock status 229 indicates that the user is not clocked-in, then the activity tracking service 216 could update the time-clock status 229 to reflect that the user clocked-in at the start of his or her shift.
Dhebar [column 1 lines 49-57] teaches contractor may forget to record his or her time or forget to start or stop a timer. Likewise, an employee may forget to clock-in or clock-out (timestamps) at the beginning or end of a shift. For example, an individual may press a button on a timer or place a punch-card into a time-clock (a digital clock), but the button may (wave gesture) fail to start or stop the timer or the time-clock may fail to record the time. This can result in inaccurate records.
Dhebar teaches a first user device, and a second user device, and location, [column 5 lines 63-66] a company issued mobile device may use the reporting application 241 to regularly report its current location to the data collection service 213.
Dhebar [column 5 lines 15-22] teaches the client device 103 may include one or more sensors 239 that can be used to collect data about the environment of the client device 103, or the activity being performed by the client device 103. Examples of sensors 239 can include motion or kinetic sensors that can determine when the client device 103 is in motion (e.g., accelerometers, speedometers, etc.), geolocation sensors (e.g., global positioning (GPS) or similar sensor systems),
Malik teaches determining a geographic zone for monitoring and receiving data related to a contact of a user entering the geographic zone. Dhebar teaches tracking time. It would have been obvious to combine before the effective filing date, using instant messaging protocol to monitor that at least one other user may be a stationary zone and/or a moving zone, as taught by Malik, with correcting an incorrect time status, as taught by Dhebar, so track how much time is spent on a task in order to accurately bill customers for services., Dhebar [column 1 lines 9-10].
(Although not relied on, Melgar (US 20240070619 A1) [018]-[019], [022] teach clock-in, clock-out, geofencing, and verification within a geo-fence)
Regarding Claim 9, [and similarly claim 2 and claim 16] (Cancelled)
Regarding Claim 10, [and similarly claim 3 and claim 17]
The application system of claim 9, wherein the first user initiates the real-time communication session with the second user.
Malik [060] discloses FIG. 9. As illustrated in the nonlimiting example of FIG. 10, the interface 1020 may be provided in response to selection of the alerts option 530 and/or via selection of the alerts option in the interface 920 (FIG. 9). Regardless, one or more alerts may be provided to a user regarding a geographic zone. More specifically, the user can be alerted when another user enters and/or exits a zone. The data can be associated with buddies (e.g., Instant Messaging buddies and/or other contacts) and/or non-buddies (e.g., users of the same communications service, and/or users of communications devices that are otherwise unassociated with the user) of the user. Examiner submits the entering is a zone is representative of real-time, as supported in Malik [060], [064]
Regarding Claim 11, [and similarly claim 4 and claim 18] (Currently Amended)
The application system of claim 8, wherein the second user is restricted from initiating the real-time communication session.
See claim 10. Examiner submits the exiting is a zone is representative of real-time, as supported in Malik [060], [064].
Regarding Claim 12, [and similarly claim 5 and claim 19] (Cancelled)
Regarding Claim 13, [and similarly claim 6] (Original)
The application system of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to … the one or more profile matches according to predetermined criteria.
Malik [051] teaches the geographic logic 299 may be configured to determine, from location device from contacts of the user, whether a contact is currently within the moving zone. Additionally, the user may determine the size and/or shape of the zone based on a distance-based radius (e.g., a two mile radius), landmark-based radius (e.g., two blocks from current location), and/or via other criteria.
(Examiner submits determining a size, shape, and radius are criteria. Further, within the radius is a determination/evaluation of a radius criteria being met (e.g., Yes/No)).
Although highly suggested, Malik does not explicitly teach:
rank the one or more profile matches
Rathod teaches:
rank the one or more profile matches
Rathod [p. 38 lines 7-22] discloses the system monitors, tracks, stores & updates online status and available status with date & timestamp and waiting time duration to identify who is online and available first and rank service providers e.g. cab drivers as per waiting time of looking for prospective customers.
In other embodiment user interface 400 enables online, available, nearest or available within particular radius one or more types of service provider(s) e.g. 427 and/or one or more types of matched service consumer user(s) e.g. 485 to identify, view, search, match, compare & select and communicate, send or accept or reject or cancel request, send indications, bid, make offer, make payment, provide ratings & reviews, subscribe or hire or book or hire for particular date or time or as per schedule and negotiate with each other. View profile, service profile of each other. In an embodiment system also provide estimated time, distance to reach or arrive at particular location and in an embodiment provide turn by turn directions to reach or arrive at particular or current location or meet each other.
Malik teaches determining a geographic zone for monitoring and receiving data related to a contact of a user entering the geographic zone. Rathod teaches real time present or show & update listed on demand service providers. It would have been obvious to combine before the effective filing date, using instant messaging protocol to monitor that at least one other user may be a stationary zone and/or a moving zone, as taught by Malik, with matching a ranking service provider, as taught by Rathod, so online users can match, select, and identify, send or accept request for service providers., Rathod [abstract]
Regarding Claim 14, [and similarly claim 7] (Currently Amended)
The application system of claim 13, wherein the predetermined criteria includes consideration of proximity of first address information for first user device associated with the first user and second address information for a second device associated with the second user, …
Malik [060] discloses one or more alerts may be provided to a user regarding a geographic zone. More specifically, the user can be alerted when another user enters and/or exits a zone. The data can be associated with buddies (e.g., Instant Messaging buddies and/or other contacts) and/or non-buddies (e.g., users of the same communications service, and/or users of communications devices that are otherwise unassociated with the user) of the user., Malik [060], [Figure 9]Although highly suggested, Malik does not explicitly teach:
… consideration of overlap between one or more needs for the first user and one or more services for the second user, consideration of overlap between first availability information for the first user and second availability information for the second user, or any combination thereof.
Rathod teaches:
consideration of overlap between one or more needs for the first user and one or more services for the second user, consideration of overlap between first availability information for the first user and second availability information for the second user, or any combination thereof.
Rathod [p. 44 lines 22-30] teaches the user can interact with the touch-sensitive display 630 to make selections on the different user interface features 615 so that area-specific information (that is based on the user selections) can be provided with the user interface features 615.
Rathod [p. 42 lines 1- 27] teaches rank- wise list of available service providers based on online status, availability status, calculated or estimated approximate price or fare or rate, real-time updated distance to arrive or reach, real-time updated calculated or estimated approximate time or duration to arrive or reach, ratings, preferences, calculated or estimated approximate time to reach at destinations or drop-off location or providing service(s) and like. In other embodiment monitoring, tracking & storing each user's and/or service provider's pickup and drop-off locations or service consumption or service providing locations with date & time, check-in or check-out place with date & time, traffic at or from-to particular location(s) or place & associate details, duration and description after reaching or dropping off from vehicle, associate route, actual time & distance to arrive or reach, fare or charges paid or charged and based on that determine or provide best or competitive or comparative current route(s) to reach or arrive at particular location or place at particular date & time, actual time & distance to currently reach at particular location(s) or place(s) at particular date & time and actual or best current fare required to pay to reach at particular location or place via particular vehicle brand or type , wherein said monitored or tracked data provided by services providers and/or users and/or automatically identified, calculate & tracked based on status, locations, date & time, fare database., Rathod [p. 42 lines 1- 27]
Malik teaches determining a geographic zone for monitoring and receiving data related to a contact of a user entering the geographic zone. Rathod teaches real time present or show & update listed on demand service providers. It would have been obvious to combine before the effective filing date, using instant messaging protocol to monitor that at least one other user may be a stationary zone and/or a moving zone, as taught by Malik, with matching a ranking service provider, as taught by Rathod, so online users can match, select, and identify, send or accept request for service providers., Rathod [abstract]
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Luo (2019, A two-stage approach to ridesharing assignment and auction in a crowdsourcing collaborative transportation platform). Discloses ranking the service provider.
Melgar (US 20240070619 A1) teaches clock-in and clock- out and geofencing.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 THEA LABOGIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9149. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday, 8am-5pm.
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, Patricia Munson can be reached at 571-270- 5396. 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.
/THEA LABOGIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3624 /PATRICIA H MUNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights