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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the application filed on 23 August 2024. Claims 1-20 are currently pending. The rejections are as stated 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. In particular, claims are directed to a judicial exception (abstract idea) without significantly more.
The instant claims are rejected under 35 USC 101 in view of The Decision in Alice Corporation Ply. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al. in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the patent claims in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al. ("Alice Corp. ") are not patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Claim 1 (exemplary) recites a series of steps for managing queues and facilitating transactions based on an exchange of queue position.
The claim is directed to a process, which is a statutory category of invention.
The claim is then analyzed to determine whether it is directed to a judicial exception.
Independent method claim 1, recites the limitations of determining whether a first queuing device and an unregistered device have exchanged physical positions using position data; determining whether the first queuing device is in a more favorable physical position than it had been prior to the exchanged physical positions; in response to determining that the first queuing device is in the more favorable physical position, transferring an exchange amount from a first digital wallet corresponding to the first queuing device to a temporary storage for a user of the unregistered device to retrieve; obtaining contact information of the user of the unregistered device; generating a message to the user notifying the user of availability of the exchange amount to retrieve; and transmitting the message to the user of the unregistered queuing device.
These limitations, as drafted, are processes that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations via transactional activities/interactions (such as a fundamental economic concept or managing interactions between people), but for the recitation of generic computer components, nothing in the claim precludes the limitations from practically being performed by a method of organizing human activity which includes commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing, or sales activities or behaviors; business relations). These limitations are directed to an abstract idea because they are commercial or legal interactions or sales activities (processing transaction, order routing and marketplace bidding process). If a claim limitation covers commercial or legal interactions but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the "Certain Methods of Organizing Activity" grouping of abstract ideas. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2).
Accordingly, independent claim 1 recites an abstract idea.
Next, the claim is analyzed to determine if it is integrated into a practical application. The claim recites additional limitation of one or more computing devices of a queue management system and one or more position sensors of the first queuing device to perform the steps. The processor in the steps is recited at a high level of generality, i.e., as a generic computer performing a generic computer function of processing data (see Applicant’s specification ¶¶ 0096-0098). This generic computer limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer component. Also, these limitations are an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim is directed to the abstract idea.
Next, the claim is analyzed to determine if there are additional claim limitations that individually, or as an ordered combination, ensure that the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract ideas (whether claim provides inventive concept). As discussed above, the recitation of the claimed limitations amounts to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a server (using the computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea). Taking the additional elements individually and in combination, the server at each step of the process performs purely generic computer functions. As such, there is no inventive concept sufficient to transform the claimed subject matter into a patent-eligible application. The same analysis applies here, i.e., mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at or provide an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination does not add anything further than looking at the limitations individually. When viewed either individually, or as an ordered combination, the additional limitations do not amount to a claim as a whole that is significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
The analysis above applies to the statutory category of invention of claims 1, 8 and 15. Furthermore, dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20 do not add limitations that meaningfully limit the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20, recites the additional limitations of the first queuing device and the unregistered device are vehicle computer systems, are mobile communication devices, the message comprises: an e-mail, a phone call, a physical mail/correspondence, a push notification, or a Short Message Service (SMS) message, the exchange amount comprises: a fiat currency, a digital currency, a coupon, or a credit, generating as a part of the message, a hyperlink for the user to register the unregistered device to the queue management system and transferring the exchange amount from the first digital wallet to the temporary storage is done in real-time from when the first queuing device is determined to be in the more favorable physical position than it had been prior to the exchanged physical positions. These limitations further define the abstract idea and are rejected under the same rational of claim 1. The claims merely amounts to the application or instructions to apply the abstract idea on a generic processor, and is considered to amount to nothing more than requiring a generic computer to merely carry out the abstract idea itself.
The dependent claims do not impart patent eligibility to the abstract idea of the independent claims. Therefore, none of the dependent claims alone or as an ordered combination add limitations that qualify as integrating the abstract idea into a practical application.
The dependent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements are simply steps performed by a generic computer.
Accordingly, claims 1-20 are rejected as ineligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. 101 based upon the same analysis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MERHAV (US 20160026934 A1), hereinafter “MERHAV”.
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15, MERHAV discloses a computer-implemented method and corresponding system, comprising the steps of
determining, by one or more computing devices of a queue management system, whether a first queuing device and an unregistered device have exchanged physical positions using position data obtained from one or more position sensors of the first queuing device; determining whether the first queuing device is in a more favorable physical position than it had been prior to the exchanged physical positions; in response to determining that the first queuing device is in the more favorable physical position, transferring an exchange amount from a first digital wallet corresponding to the first queuing device to a temporary storage for a user of the unregistered device to retrieve; obtaining contact information of the user of the unregistered device; generating a message to the user notifying the user of availability of the exchange amount to retrieve; and transmitting the message to the user of the unregistered queuing device (abstract and ¶¶ 0011 and 0020-0025).
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 17, MERHAV discloses the first queuing device and the unregistered device are mobile communication devices (¶¶ 0020-0022).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18, MERHAV discloses the message comprises: an e-mail, a phone call, a physical mail/correspondence, a push notification, or a Short Message Service (SMS) message (¶¶ 0020 and 0025).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 19, MERHAV discloses the exchange amount comprises: a fiat currency, a digital currency, a coupon, or a credit (¶¶ 0020-0025).
Regarding claims 7, 14 and 20, MERHAV discloses transferring the exchange amount from the first digital wallet to the temporary storage is done in real-time from when the first queuing device is determined to be in the more favorable physical position than it had been prior to the exchanged physical positions (¶¶ 0020-0024).
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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AlA) 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 2, 6, 9, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MERHAV.
Regarding claims 2, 6, 9, 13 and 16, MERHAV fails to disclose the first queuing device and the unregistered device are vehicle computer systems and generating as a part of the message, a hyperlink for the user to register the unregistered device to the queue management system.
Official notice is hereby taken that vehicle computer systems and generating as a part of the message, a hyperlink for the user to register the unregistered device is old and well known in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify MERHAV to include the first queuing device and the unregistered device are vehicle computer systems and generating as a part of the message, a hyperlink for the user to register the unregistered device to the queue management system for enhancing the functionality of the system by greatly improving the performance/accuracy of the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dunko US 20140019603 A1 discloses “systems and methods for providing interactive queuing are provided. In this regard, a representative method includes: assigning users of electronic devices to corresponding positions of a queue, each of the users being associated with a corresponding one of the electronic devices; and providing queue information to the users via the electronic devices”.
DuLeone et al. US 20160180412 A1 discloses "a method for minimizing a physical queue for a first guest attraction, the method including storing a guest identifier corresponding to a guest in a first virtual queue, wherein a position of the guest within the first virtual queue is associated with an estimated wait time for the first guest attraction, updating the first virtual queue when the position of the guest within the first virtual queue is changed, providing a notification to the guest to enter the physical queue when the position of the guest in the first virtual queue is less than or equal to a threshold position of the first virtual queue, removing the guest identifier from the first virtual queue in response to an indication to dequeue the guest from the first virtual queue, storing the guest identifier in a second virtual queue corresponding to the physical queue, and removing the guest identifier from the second virtual queue in response to an indication that the guest is exiting the physical queue".
STANAR et al. US 20160299781 A1 discloses “Optimizing a priority queue for a computer network … maintain the priority queue with a plurality of queue entries, wherein the priority queue includes a first queue entry and a second queue entry, and a first score is associated with the first queue entry, and a second score is associated with the second queue entry; receive, from a first client computer, input indicating performance of a first activity associated with the first queue entry; receive, from a second client computer, input indicating performance of a second activity associated with the second queue entry; update, at the server computer, the first score by the first amount and the second score by a second amount; change, at the server computer, the position of the first queue entry and the second queue entry in the priority queue”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hani Kazimi whose telephone number is (571) 272-6745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, Abhishek Vyas can be reached on (571) 270-1836. 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.
Respectfully Submitted
/HANI M KAZIMI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3691
Prosecution Insights