DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to the following communication: Amendment filed on 20 February 2026.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-13, 15-16, 18-22, 24, and 25 is/are pending and present for examination. Claim(s) 1, 13, and 25 is/are in independent form.
The instant application claim priority to U.S. Application No. 17/476,863, with a priority date of 16 September 2021.
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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 18-19, 21, 22, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Disley et al, USPGPUB No. 2017/0374425, filed on 31 March 2015, and published on 28 December 2017, in view of Castaing et al, USPGPUB No. 2024/0184799, filed on 28 October 2022, claiming priority to 6 April 2021, and published on 6 June 2024.
As per independent claims 1, 13, and 25, Disley, in combination with Castaing, discloses:
A server computer system comprising:
a processor {See Disley, [0038], wherein this reads over “The computer system 102 comprises a processor 112 (which may include multiple processing components or multiple virtual or physical servers operating together), program memory 114, data memory 116 and a network interface 118”};
a communications module coupled to the processor {See Disley, [0038], wherein this reads over “The computer system 102 comprises a processor 112 (which may include multiple processing components or multiple virtual or physical servers operating together), program memory 114, data memory 116 and a network interface 118”}; and
a memory coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed {See Disley, [0038], wherein this reads over “The computer system 102 comprises a processor 112 (which may include multiple processing components or multiple virtual or physical servers operating together), program memory 114, data memory 116 and a network interface 118”}, configure the processor to:
generate a recommendation to create a data record at least at one third party server {See Disley, [0075], wherein this reads over “Each case item 616 may be associated with a corresponding data record which may be stored at database 108 and/or in data memory 116 of the computer system 102. The case items 616 may relate to cases pertinent to the online meeting being conducted in the online collaboration environment”};
retrieve previously-obtained identity data required to create a data record at least at one third-party server {See Disley, [0064], wherein this reads over “In some embodiments, a user is provided with sign-in details or credentials, for example, a username and password, which may be employed to securely access the web portal application 202 for scheduling and/or coordinating online meetings”};
provide, via the communications module and to the at least one third-party server, the previously-obtained identity data to create the data record {See Disley, [0065], wherein this reads over “In some embodiments, the browser application 302 receives login credentials via the login page of the web portal which triggers the processor 120 of the computing device 104 to execute code of the browser application 302 to cause a login request to be transmitted to the computer system 102 for verification, at 404.”};
receive, via the communications module and from the at least one third-party server, a signal indicating confirmation of the creation of the data record {See Castaing, [0037]-[0043], wherein this reads over “receiving at a local data management system a message request from a service application for performing certain actions to primary data of a central data record stored in a database of a central data management system; transmitting the message request to the central data management system via a communication module; receiving the message request at the central data management system; performing at the central data management system the actions indicated in the message request; and issuing an acknowledgement notification to the confirming the execution of the actions requested; wherein upon receiving the acknowledgement notification, the local data management system is configured for updating the corresponding records to reflect any changes made to the corresponding data records; and wherein the communication module is configured for facilitating the communication of messages between the central and the local data management system by converting the data format of the transmitted message to a first or second data format depending on the destination data management system.”};
obtain, via the communications module and from the at least one third-party server, account data associated with the data record {See Disley, [0077], wherein this reads over “Thus, the browser application 302 is responsive to receipt of a request to add a new case item to the web portal application to transmit a request to the data handling module 210 to cause the creation of a new data record for the case item.”}; and
send, via the communications module and to a computing device, a signal causing the computing device to update a bill management interface to include the account data {See Disley, [0080], wherein this reads over “As depicted in FIG. 7, an information screen 710 associated with the patient details topic option 606 displayed in the display window 608 comprises a patient information form 702 comprising a plurality of information fields 704 or text boxes for receiving information detailing particulars of the case. The information fields 704 are arranged to receive text inputted by the user via the user interface 124 of the computing device 104. The patient information form 702 provides a user selectable save option 706 to allow the information inserted into the information fields 704 to be saved as a new case item 616. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4, when information or data inputted into the information fields 704, selection of the save option 706 triggers code of the browser application 302 being executed by the processor 120 to transmit the information to the data handling module 210 of the web portal application 202, at 420. As shown in FIG. 5, in response to receiving the information from browser application 302, the data handling module 210 being executed by the processor 112 may cause the computer system 102 to store the information in the data record associated with the case item 616, at 518”}.
Disley fails to expressly disclose the claimed feature of “receive, via the communications module and from the at least one third-party server, a signal indicating confirmation of the creation of the data record.” Disley is directed to the invention of …
Castaing is directed to the invention of exchanging and managing data stored in heterogeneous data sources. Specifically, Castaing discloses that “receiving at a local data management system a message request from a service application for performing certain actions to primary data of a central data record stored in a database of a central data management system; transmitting the message request to the central data management system via a communication module; receiving the message request at the central data management system; performing at the central data management system the actions indicated in the message request; and issuing an acknowledgement notification to the confirming the execution of the actions requested; wherein upon receiving the acknowledgement notification, the local data management system is configured for updating the corresponding records to reflect any changes made to the corresponding data records; and wherein the communication module is configured for facilitating the communication of messages between the central and the local data management system by converting the data format of the transmitted message to a first or second data format depending on the destination data management system.” See Castaing, [0037]-[0043]. That is, Castaing discloses that an acknowledgement notification may be issued in response to an execution of an action (i.e., a creation of a data record). Castaing further discloses that the acknowledgement is received for the actions executed at a central data management system (i.e., a third-party server). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art of Disley with that of Castaing such that data modification actions of Disley may prompt the acknowledgement of said actions as so disclosed by Castaing. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that the system may continue knowing that the data modification actions have been completed successfully.
As per dependent claims 3 and 15, Disley, in combination with Castaing, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 1, wherein the previously-obtained identity data is retrieved from one or more of a data store, a digital identity network, or an application programming interface (API) associated with at least one additional third-party server {See Disley, [0049], wherein this reads over “As shown in FIG. 5, in response to receiving the information from browser application 302, the data handling module 210 being executed by the processor 112 may cause the computer system 102 to store the information in the data record associated with the case item 616, at 518. In some embodiments, the data handling module 210 may pass details of the information to the web server 220 for updating page code associated with web portal display 600 of the home topic option 606 for a particular calendar date as shown in FIG. 6”}.
As per dependent claim 4, Disley, in combination with Castaing, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 3, wherein the at least one additional third-party server maintains another data record associated with the computing device {See Disley, Figure 1}.
As per dependent claims 7 and 18, Disley, in combination with Castaing, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 1, wherein when generating the recommendation to create the data record at the at least one third-party server, the instructions, when executed, further configure the processor to:
determine one or more additional third-party servers that maintain a data record for a user associated with the computing device {See Disley, [0073], wherein this reads over “Referring again to FIG. 4, the browser application 302 receives the code from the web server 220 and the processor 120 executes the code to cause the browser application 302 to display information associated with the selected topic option 606, at 414 and the method reverts to 410 awaiting further requests or instructions from the user interface 224, at 410. In some embodiments, selection of a topic options 606 triggers code of the browser application 302 being executed by the processor 120 to execute an applet within the code of the browser application 302 to display information associated with the selected topic option 606”}; and
generate the recommendation based on the one or more additional third-party servers {See Disley, [0073], wherein this reads over “Referring again to FIG. 4, the browser application 302 receives the code from the web server 220 and the processor 120 executes the code to cause the browser application 302 to display information associated with the selected topic option 606, at 414 and the method reverts to 410 awaiting further requests or instructions from the user interface 224, at 410. In some embodiments, selection of a topic options 606 triggers code of the browser application 302 being executed by the processor 120 to execute an applet within the code of the browser application 302 to display information associated with the selected topic option 606”}.
As per dependent claims 8 and 19, Disley, in combination with Castaing, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed, further configure the processor to:
send, via the communications module and to the computing device, a signal causing the computing device to display the recommendation, the recommendation including a selectable option to create the data record at the at least one third-party server {See Disley, [0077], wherein this reads over “Referring to FIG. 5, the data handling module 210 of the web portal application 202 receives the request from the browser application 302 and creates a new data record for the new case item 616 in the database 108 and/or data memory 128, at 514. Thus, the browser application 302 is responsive to receipt of a request to add a new case item to the web portal application to transmit a request to the data handling module 210 to cause the creation of a new data record for the case item”}; and
receive, via the communications module and from the computing device, a signal indicating selection of the selectable option to create the data record at the at least one third-party server {See Disley, [0077], wherein this reads over “Referring to FIG. 5, the data handling module 210 of the web portal application 202 receives the request from the browser application 302 and creates a new data record for the new case item 616 in the database 108 and/or data memory 128, at 514. Thus, the browser application 302 is responsive to receipt of a request to add a new case item to the web portal application to transmit a request to the data handling module 210 to cause the creation of a new data record for the case item”}.
As per dependent claims 10 and 21, Disley, in combination with Castaing, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 9, wherein the instructions, when executed, further configure the processor to:
send, via the communications module and to the computing device, a signal causing the computing device to display a selectable option to close at least one of the one or more data records hosted by the one or more additional third-party servers {See Disley, [0082], wherein this reads over “The patient information form 702 also provides a user selectable cancel option 708 to cancel or delete the information inserted into the information fields 704 and/or to revert to the home topic option 606 and associated display window 608, as depicted in FIG. 6”};
receive, via the communications module and from the computing device, a signal indicating selection of the selectable option to close a particular data record hosted by a particular additional third-party server {See Disley, [0082], wherein this reads over “In some embodiments, selection of the cancel option 708 triggers code of the browser application 302 to transmit a cancel or delete request to the data handling module 210 of the web portal application 202, at 418, as shown in FIG. 4”}; and
send, via the communications module and to the particular additional third-party server, a signal requesting that the particular data record be closed {See Disley, [0082], wherein this reads over “Referring to FIG. 5, in response to receiving the cancel or delete request, the data handling module 210 may delete the information associated with the delete request from the data record associated with the case item 616, at 516. In some embodiments, the data handling module 210 may pass details of delete request to the web server 220 to cause the web server 220 to update page code associated with the web portal display 600 of the home topic option 606 for a particular calendar date as shown in FIG. 6”}.
As per dependent claims 11 and 22, Disley, in combination with Castaing, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed, further configure the processor to:
engage an application programming interface (API) associated with the third-party server to initiate the creation of the data record {See Disley, [0077], wherein this reads over “In some embodiments, as depicted in FIG. 4, selection of a user selectable addition option 620 triggers code of the browser application 302 being executed by the processor 120 to transmit a request to create a new data record to the data handling module 210 of the web portal application 202 deployed on the computer system 102, at 416”};
generate an API request that includes the previously-obtained identity data {See Disley, [0077], wherein this reads over “In some embodiments, as depicted in FIG. 4, selection of a user selectable addition option 620 triggers code of the browser application 302 being executed by the processor 120 to transmit a request to create a new data record to the data handling module 210 of the web portal application 202 deployed on the computer system 102, at 416”}; and
send, via the communications module and to the API associated with the third-party server, the generated API request {See Disley, [0077], wherein this reads over “Thus, the browser application 302 is responsive to receipt of a request to add a new case item to the web portal application to transmit a request to the data handling module 210 to cause the creation of a new data record for the case item”}.
Claim(s) 5, 9, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Disley, in view of Castaing, and in further view of Walker et al, USPGPUB No 2014/0257852, filed on 5 March 2014, and published on 11 September 2014.
As per dependent claims 5 and 16, Disley, in combination with Castaing and Walker, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed, further configure the processor to:
determine that the previously-obtained identity data is not sufficient to complete the creation of the data record {See Walker, [0104], wherein this reads over “The patient record 1904 is a data file or folder of virtual data records which can be accessed and updated to provide any necessary user treatment information. The application server 1906 provides the outsourced application (i.e., cloud source) which retrieves user information, processes user information and initiates certain actions to assist the user's health care. The third-party server 1908 may be any information source utilized to provide information requested by the application 1906”; and [0105], wherein this reads over “In one example method of operation, the patient record may be updated 1910 and retrieved 1912 to include any new treatment information since the last update”};
send, via the communications module and to the computing device, a signal causing the computing device to display a request for identity data to complete the creation of the data record {See Walker, [0105], wherein this reads over “The patient device 1902 may receive notifications regarding the new content 1924” and “The patient may select a content title 1926 to view which then causes the patient device 1902 to retrieve the content from a third-party server 1908 and receive the content 1928 accordingly”};
receive, via the communications module and from the computing device, a signal that includes the requested identity data {See Walker, [0105], wherein this reads over “The patient may select a content title 1926 to view which then causes the patient device 1902 to retrieve the content from a third-party server 1908 and receive the content 1928 accordingly”}; and
provide, via the communications module and to the at least one third-party server, the requested identity data {See Walker, [0105], wherein this reads over “The patient may select a content title 1926 to view which then causes the patient device 1902 to retrieve the content from a third-party server 1908 and receive the content 1928 accordingly”}.
The cited prior art of Disley fails to expressly disclose the claimed features of the instant claim. Walker is directed to the invention of managing user health records utilizing a primary database and a plurality of third-party data record sources.
As per the claimed feature of “determine that the previously-obtained identity data is not sufficient to complete the creation of the data record,” Walker discloses that “[t]he patient record 1904 is a data file or folder of virtual data records which can be accessed and updated to provide any necessary user treatment information” wherein “[t]he application server 1906 provides the outsourced application (i.e., cloud source) which retrieves user information, processes user information and initiates certain actions to assist the user's health care.” See Walker, [0104]. Additionally, Walker discloses that “the patient record may be updated 1910 and retrieved 1912 to include any new treatment information since the last update.” See Walker, [0105]. That is, Walker discloses updating of a record when new information is present since a last update (i.e. determining the instant data is not sufficient to complete the creation of the record).
As per the claimed feature of “send, via the communications module and to the computing device, a signal causing the computing device to display a request for identity data to complete the creation of the data record,” Walker discloses that “[t]he patient device 1902 may receive notifications regarding the new content 1924” and “[t]he patient may select a content title 1926 to view which then causes the patient device 1902 to retrieve the content from a third-party server 1908 and receive the content 1928 accordingly.” See Walker, [0105]. That is, a notification regarding the updated information may be received which may then allow for a content title to be selected for content retrieval (i.e. displaying a request for identity data to complete the creation of the data record).
As per the claimed feature of “receive, via the communications module and from the computing device, a signal that includes the requested identity data,” Walker discloses that “[t]he patient may select a content title 1926 to view which then causes the patient device 1902 to retrieve the content from a third-party server 1908 and receive the content 1928 accordingly.” See Walker, [0105]. That is, Walker discloses that content from a third-party server may be returned (i.e. receiving the requested identity data).
As per the claimed feature of “provide, via the communications module and to the at least one third-party server, the requested identity data,” Walker discloses that “[t]he patient may select a content title 1926 to view which then causes the patient device 1902 to retrieve the content from a third-party server 1908 and receive the content 1928 accordingly.” The receipt of the data would read upon the claimed feature of “provide… the requested identity data.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art of Disley with that of Walker such that medical record system of Disley may be further improved with the prior art of Walker to further include utilizing identity data to complete the incomplete records of Disley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that the incomplete data records may be populated utilized relevant data retrieved from third-party data sources.
As per dependent claims 9 and 20, Disley, in combination with Castaing and Walker, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed, further configure the processor to:
obtain authentication information for one or more data records hosted by one or more additional third-party servers {See Walker, [0104], wherein this reads over “The application server 1906 provides the outsourced application (i.e., cloud source) which retrieves user information, processes user information and initiates certain actions to assist the user's health care. The third-party server 1908 may be any information source utilized to provide information requested by the application 1906”};
obtain, via the communications module and from the one or more additional third-party servers, account data associated with the one or more data records {See Walker, [0105], wherein this reads over “The patient may select a content title 1926 to view which then causes the patient device 1902 to retrieve the content from a third-party server 1908 and receive the content 1928 accordingly”}; and
sending, via the communications module and to the computing device, a signal causing the computing device to update the bill management interface to include the account data {See Walker, [0105], wherein this reads over “The content can be viewed 1930 and the patient record 1904 may be updated to reflect the user account 1932 having completed a required content title”}.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Disley, in view of Castaing, and in further view of Lamba et al, USPGPUB No. 2020/0342429, filed on 9 July 2020, and published on 29 October 2020.
As per dependent claim 12, Disley, in combination with Castaing and Lamba, discloses:
The server computer system of claim 1, wherein the account data includes an amount owing and the signal causing the computing device to update the bill management interface causes the computing device to display a selectable option to submit payment based on the amount owing {See Lamba, [0107], wherein this reads over “At 810, the computing device may receive bill information in response to the request. For example, the bill information may include a listing of items ordered and an amount owed by the buyer for the items order. As one example, the merchant device may send the bill information to the service computing device, which forwards the bill information to the buyer device. As another example, if the merchant device is able to communicate directly with the buyer device, the merchant device may send the bill information directly to the buyer device.”; and [0108], wherein this reads over “At 812, the computing device may present a user interface including the bill information. For example, the buyer application may present the bill information in a user interface to enable the buyer to review the bill, add a gratuity, and provide a payment authorization for payment of the bill”}.
The prior art of Disley fails to disclosed the aforementioned features of the instant claim. Lamba is directed to the invention of location-based transaction completion.
As per the claimed feature of “wherein the account data includes an amount owing and the signal causing the computing device to update the bill management interface causes the computing device to display a selectable option to submit payment based on the amount owing,” Lamba discloses that “the merchant device may send the bill information to the service computing device, which forwards the bill information to the buyer device.” See Lamba, [0107]. That is, Lamba discloses the updating of the bill management interface by forwarding the bill information to a buyer device. Additionally, Lamba discloses that “the buyer application may present the bill information in a user interface to enable the buyer to review the bill, add a gratuity, and provide a payment authorization for payment of the bill.” See Lamba, [0108]. That is, Lamba discloses an interface allowing for the buyer to submit payment for the bill. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art of Disley with that of Lamba such that the data record management system of Disley may further include the feature of providing bill management services as disclosed by Lindy. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that costs associated with records may be managed and reconciled via the bill management system of Lamba.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Disley, in view of Casting, and in further view of Lindy et al, USPGPUB No 2021/0056509, filed on 5 March 2014, and published on 11 September 2014.
As per dependent claim 24, Disley, in combination with Castaing and Lindy, discloses:
The method of claim 13, further comprising:
send, to the third-party server, a signal including a request to reduce a cost associated with the data record based on at least some of the previously-obtained identity data satisfying predefined criteria {See Lindy, [0118], wherein this reads over “If a change in amenity score exceeds a certain threshold, the system may automatically, or in response to user prompting, adjust the unit rental price for the associated unit (step 939). The adjusted rental price may then be communicated to update the rental units record, which update in turn may be communicated to any appropriate database listing or tracking the units of the multi-unit dwellings 51 under management of system 10, such as network storage resources 81 or associated remote databases 79 accessed by other computer systems or other parties associated with MUDs 51 under management”}.
The prior art of Disley fails to disclosed the aforementioned features of the instant claim. Lindy is directed to a property management system for managing records.
As per the claimed feature of “send, to the third-party server, a signal including a request to reduce a cost associated with the data record based on at least some of the previously-obtained identity data satisfying predefined criteria,” Lindy discloses that “[i]f a change in amenity score exceeds a certain threshold, the system may automatically, or in response to user prompting, adjust the unit rental price for the associated unit (step 939)” such that “[t]he adjusted rental price may then be communicated to update the rental units record, which update in turn may be communicated to any appropriate database listing or tracking the units of the multi-unit dwellings 51 under management of system 10, such as network storage resources 81 or associated remote databases 79 accessed by other computer systems or other parties associated with MUDs 51 under management.” See Lindy, [0118]. That is, Lindy discloses the adjusting of a price (i.e. reduce a cost associated with a data record) based upon an amenity score exceeding a threshold (i.e. satisfying a predefined criteria). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art of Disley with that of Lindy such that the data record management system of Disley may further include the feature of reducing costs associated with a record as disclosed by Lindy. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that costs associated with records may be automatically modified based upon a predefined criteria/threshold being met.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 20 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant asserts the argument that Disley does not disclose the claimed feature of “send, via the communications module and to a computing device, a signal causing the computing device to update a bill management interface to include the account data.” See Amendment, pages 10-11. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Disley discloses a system for managing patient information data. Additionally, Disley discloses that “the data handling module 210 being executed by the processor 112 may cause the computer system 102 to store the information in the data record associated with the case item 616.” See Disley, [0080]. That is, Disley discloses the storing of information (i.e., causing a device to update) in a data record (i.e., a bill management interface) with a case item (i.e., to include the account data). While Applicant asserts that “[n]othing in paragraph [0080] suggest the creation or management of third-party billing accounts or the updating of a bill management user interface, whose function is to display or manage bills, with third-party billing account data,” it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., display or manage bills) 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). Furthermore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed features of “the communications module” and “a bill management interface,” it is noted that Disley’s disclosure of “a data handling module” would read upon “the communications module” while the web server which updates page a code associated with a web portal display would read upon the claimed feature of “a bill management interface.” Wherein the claim fails to expressly disclose or further limit the feature of “a bill management interface,” it is noted that the module of Disley would read upon said feature.
Secondly, Applicant asserts the argument that Disley fails to disclose or anticipate the claimed feature of “retrieve previously-obtained identity data required to create a data record at least at one third-party server” and “provide, via the communications module and to the at least one third-party server, the previously-obtained identity data to create the data record.” See Amendment, page 11. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in [0065] of Disley, the browser application 302 receives login credentials… which triggers the processor 120 of the computing device 104 to execute code of the browser application to cause a login request to be transmitted to the computer system 102 for verification.” That is, Disley discloses that login credentials (i.e., previously-obtained identity data) entered at computing device 104 (i.e., a first device) may be used to communicate with computer system 102 (i.e., a third-party server). Furthermore, Disley discloses that “selection of a user selectable addition option 620 triggers code of the browser application 302 being executed by the processor 120 to transmit a request to create a new data record to the data handling module 210 of the web portal application 202 deployed on the computer system 102.” See Disley, [0077]. That is, a new data record may be created on computer system 102 (i.e., the third-party server).
Lastly, Applicant asserts the argument that “[i]ntegrating third-party billing account provisioning into Disley would require a fundamental architectural redesign that introduces new trust boundaries, external data dependencies, and cross-system signaling mechanisms not contemplated by either reference” and that “[s]uch a modification would not constitute a predictable or routine combination of known elements, but rather impermissible hindsight reconstruction using Applicant's disclosure as a roadmap.” See Amendment, page 13. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the prior art of Disley with that of Castaing such that data modification actions of Disley may prompt the acknowledgement of said actions as so disclosed by Castaing. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make the aforementioned combination such that the system may continue knowing that the data modification actions have been completed successfully.
For the aforementioned reasons above, the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 are maintained.
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 PAUL KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2737. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-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, Neveen Abel-Jalil can be reached on (571) 270-0474. 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.
/Paul Kim/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2152
/PK/
Prosecution Insights