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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s submission filed 10/21/24 has been entered. Claims 1 -23 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statements, filed on 9/9/24 have been received, and entered into the record.
However, it is impractical for the examiner to review the references thoroughly with the number of references cited in this case. By initializing each of the cited references on the accompanying 1449 forms, the examiner is merely acknowledging the submission of the cited references and indicating that only a cursory review has been made of the cited references.
MPEP § 2004.13 states: It is desirable to avoid the submission of long lists of documents if it can be avoided. Eliminate clearly irrelevant and marginally pertinent cumulative information. If a long list is submitted, highlight those documents which have been specifically brought to applicant’s attention and/or are known to be of most significance. See Penn Yan Boats, Inc. v. Sea Lark Boats, Inc., 359 F. Supp. 948, 175 USPQ 260 (S.D. Fla. 1972), aft 'd, 479 F.2d 1338, 178 USPQ 577 (Sth Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 874 (1974). But cf. Molins PLC v. Textron Inc., 48 F.3d 1172, 33 USPQ2d 1823 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
Further, it should be noted that an applicant’s duty of disclosure of material and information is not satisfied by presenting a patent examiner with "a mountain of largely irrelevant material from which he is presumed to have been able, with his experience and with adequate time, to have found the critical [material]. It ignores the real world conditions under which examiners work." Rohm & Haas Co. v. Crystal Chemical co., 722 F.2d 1556, 1573 [220 USPQ 289] (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. Denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). Patent applicant has a duty not just to disclose pertinent prior art references but to make a disclosure in such a way as not to "bury" it within other disclosures of less relevant prior art; see Golden Valley Microwave Foods Inc. v. Weaver Popcorn Co. Inc., 24 USPQ2d 180i (N~D. Ind. 1992); Molins PLC v. Textron Inc., 26 USPQ2d 1889, at 1899 (D.Del 1992); Penn Yan Boats, Inc. v. Sea Lark Boats, Inc. et al., 175 USPQ 260, at 272 (S.D. FI. 1972).
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 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims disclose the abstract idea of initiating a change to an order guide, submitting the change to a distributor, implementing the change and use the updated order guide to place subsequent orders.
STEP 1
Are the claims directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
The claims are all directed to a statutory category (e.g., a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). The answer is YES.
STEP 2A. Prong 1
Exemplary claim 20 recites the following abstract concepts that are found to include “abstract idea”:
initiate a user input from a user […]
generate a demand signal based on the change to the order guide, the demand signal indicative of a change in demand for a product that is provided by a distributor;
provide the demand signal to the distributor such that the demand signal can be used to facilitate a change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor;
determine that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete;
implement the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility responsive to determining that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete; and
use the order guide to facilitate placement of an order for the product that is provided by the distributor for the facility after implementing the change to the order guide...”
The remaining limitations are no more than computer elements (i.e., circuitry, a user device) to be used as a tool to perform this abstract idea.
The recited limitations cover a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers subject matter viewed as a certain method of organizing human activity with the additional recitation of generic computer components. For example, but for the “circuitry, user device” language, “initiate, generate, provide, determine, implement, use:” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually initiating a change to an order guide, submitting the change to a distributor, the distributor implementing the change and the user using the updated order guide to place subsequent orders.
The practice of initiate, generate, provide, determine, implement, as well as using data to place orders is a commercial or legal interaction long prevalent in our system of commerce. The claims recite the idea of performing various conceptual steps generically resulting in the placement of orders using updated order guide. As determined earlier, none of these steps recites specific technological implementation details, but instead get to this result by receiving, selecting and determining data. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea, specifically a certain method of organizing human activity
STEP 2A, Prong 2
Are there additional elements or a combination of elements in the claim that apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception?
The claim recites a memory, circuitry, and a user device. These additional elements are recited at a high level of generality. Accordingly, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application and no meaningful limits are imposed on practicing the abstract idea.
The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
STEP 2B
The next issue is whether the claims provide an inventive concept because the additional elements recited in the claims provide significantly more than the recited judicial exception. Taking the claim elements separately, the function performed by the computer system at each step of the process is purely conventional. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a memory, circuitry, user device 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 claim is not patent eligible.
Considered as an ordered combination, the computer components of Applicants' claims add nothing that is not already present when the steps are considered separately. The claimed invention does not focus on an improvement in computers as tools, but rather certain independently abstract ideas that use computers as tools. {Elec. Power, 830 F.3d at 1354). (Step 2B: NO).
There is no indication that indication that the circuitry is anything other than a generic, off-the-shelf computer component, and the Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs. Court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
Independent claims 19, 20 recite similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same rationale.
The dependent claims when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea. The claims provide minimal technical structure or components for further consideration either individually or as ordered combinations with the independent claims. As such, additional recited limitations in the dependent claims only refine the identified abstract idea further. Further refinement of an abstract idea does not convert an abstract idea into something concrete.
Accordingly, a conclusion that the collecting step is well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer Option 2.
See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity.
i. 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); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350,1355,112 USPQ2d 1093,1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hoteis.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result-a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink." (emphasis added));
iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306,1334,115 USPQ2d 1681,1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363,115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
The claims are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 11-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 20020062260 A1), in view of Conkel et al. ( 2004/0107141 A1).
Re-claim 1, Inoue et al. teach-- A computer-implemented method for coordinating inventory changes, comprising:
--initiating a change to an order guide that is used to order products for a facility;
(see e.g. [0031] a procedure (free form order placement) is disclosed for a customer, at his or her end, to place an order for an item not in a merchandise assortment.
[0060] …the replacement of an item (item replacement) has been proposed by a supplier or a dealer or other sales activity entity,…)
--generating a demand signal based on the change to the order guide, the demand signal indicative of a change in demand for a product that is provided by a distributor; --providing the demand signal to the distributor such that the demand signal can be used to facilitate a change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor;
(see e.g. [0052] The items for which orders are placed and received include goods such as indirect materials or subsidiary materials, and various kinds of services. When the term item for which an order is placed and received is used, that means an item for which a customer (user belonging to a purchasing unit of a customer) places an order with a dealer, and for which the dealer receives an order from the customer. The predetermined items are generally determined by trade talks between a dealer and a customer's purchasing management person in charge.)
(see e.g. [0060] The item replacing controller 17, when the replacement of an item (item replacement) has been proposed by a supplier or a dealer or other sales activity entity, controls the replacement of the item in accordance with the automatic replace level predefined at a time such as when the MD related information based on a periodic purchase agreement was generated. )
--implementing the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility
(see e.g. [0066] Let it be assumed that, when a periodic purchase agreement is concluded, the conditions under which an item replacement is automatically to be implemented are determined by the purchasing management division of the customer. Those conditions are stored in the MD related information as an automatic replace level. Then, when an item replacement that satisfies those conditions is proposed, in cases where a new product has been proposed from a supplier, for example, the storage of the item replacement from the old product to the new product is performed automatically in accordance with the automatic replace level.
[0065] When that item replacement has been stored, in cases where the order has been placed with the old item number, the item replacing unit 21 effects control so that this is handled as an order made with the new item number.
[0075] With the item replacing unit 21 indicated in FIG. 1, when a valid new item number has been stored in the merchandise assortment data by the item replacing controller 17, the item number for which the order was placed is changed to the new item number, and a display is made to the user to the effect that the order was placed with the new item number. The item specific ordering controller 14, when an order is placed with this new item number, references the merchandise assortment data for the new item stored by the new MD data storing function 17D, and controls the placing and receiving of orders for that new item.)
--using the order guide to facilitate placement of an order for the product that is provided by the distributor for the facility after implementing the change to the order guide.
(see e.g. [0053] When a periodic purchase agreement for hanging an item not stored in the merchandise master is concluded in consultation between a customer and dealer, the new item is first stored in the merchandise master, prior to preparing the merchandise assortment. In this embodiment aspect, even in a case where the same product is handled by a plurality of dealers, descriptive images of that product or information relating to the supplier or the like is managed with the single merchandise master 3.
[0065] In the example diagrammed in FIG. 1, the server 10 comprises an item replacing unit 21 that, when an item for which a new item number is defined in the MD related information in response to the control of the item replacing controller 17 is ordered from a terminal used by a user belonging to the purchasing unit noted earlier, sets the item replaced in that new item number as the object of order placement. -- When that item replacement has been stored, in cases where the order has been placed with the old item number, the item replacing unit 21 effects control so that this is handled as an order made with the new item number.
[0066] Then, when a user selects the old product item and places an order, that is handled as the placement of an order for the new product.)
Although anticipated, Inoue et al. do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, Conkel et al. teach
--determining that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete;
--implementing the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility responsive to determining that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete; and
(see e.g.[0058] central management 26 can prepare order guides for the individual stores 10 which are presented to the individual stores under order entry module 18.
[0041] shown in Table 4. Once the proper order has been displayed the correctness of the received order can be determined and the results automatically reported to the central management 26 using the Received Order screen of order entry module 18 (Table 4).
[0044] In step 334, the manager proceeds to determine the items actually received from the distributor or vendor as they come off the truck. --Also in step 338, the data relating to the status of variations in the received order are saved so that the central management 26 can, over a period of time, review the quality of service being provided by the particular vendor or distribution center and note which items frequently have variations in delivery associated with their orders. In step 339, the actual received order information is then forwarded to the proper files for calculating and updating the ideal versus actual product usage for the particular restaurant to which the order was delivered.
[0046] The status area on the Received Order display of Table 4 also includes the possibility of substitution of products which may or may not require correction of the invoice. For example, if a thirty pound case of cheese was ordered, and the distribution center was out of that size or brand, they might substitute a twenty pound case of cheese but fail to mark changes on their invoice. This would result in the restaurant receiving only two-thirds of its order and would result in an overcharge to central management. Substitutions that are not in conformance with specifications or pricing can be noted at this point. This allows changes to be made the invoice amount to be paid to the vendor in step 338 and changes to be made in step 339 to the calculation of inventory quantities and menu item quantities which are to be used in the Ideal versus Actual (IvA) analysis which also is provided under the present invention. As part of the process of the present invention, it often will be the case that product data research exists for substituted items thereby allowing the central management to understand that the twenty pound case of cheese substituted for the ordered thirty pound case of cheese does not contain the equivalent amount of slices of cheese that two-thirds of the thirty pound case would provide.
[0047] The present invention also allows manual insertion of received items which allows proper updating of the IvA module. )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Conkel et al., so that the central management 26 can, over a period of time, review the quality of service being provided by the particular vendor or distribution center and note which items frequently have variations in delivery associated with their orders (see e.g. [0044] ).
Re-claim 2, Inoue et al. teach --The method of claim 1, wherein initiating the change to the order guide comprises receiving a request to replace a first product that is on the order guide with a second product that is not on the order guide.
(see e.g. [0057] There are also times when a request is tendered by a supplier expressing a wish that an old product be replaced by a new product by the new product being supplied from the supplier. Take the case where, for example, a manufacturer develops a product that can be recycled in a field where an environmentally compatible product previously did not exist. It is possible to suppose a case where a dealer makes a proposal to the customer, asking whether it would not be better to change an item being handled to a recyclable item in keeping with the environmental policies of that customer.)
Re-claim 3, Inoue et al. teach - The method of claim 1, wherein: --the method comprises determining the threshold inventory level by evaluating the change to the order guide relative to one or more rules.
(see e.g. [0059] With this embodiment aspect, at the time of concluding a periodic purchase agreement (when generating and storing MD related information), rules concerning item replacement are established. Then, when a proposal to change an item is actually made, processing is automatically implemented according to the conditions, inclusive of deciding whether or not to implement the item replacement.
Inoue et al. do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, Conkel et al. teach --determining that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete comprises determining that an inventory level for the product that is provided by the distributor exceeds a threshold inventory level; and
(see e.g. [0044] In step 334, the manager proceeds to determine the items actually received from the distributor or vendor as they come off the truck. The manager either enters the amount received as correlating with the amount ordered, or the manager enters a different number indicating that a variation exists between the amount ordered and the amount received from the vendor. In step 335, the manager assigns a reason for the variation which can be one of four status possibilities. Those status possibilities are that the item was "out of stock", "not on the truck", "substituted," or "discontinued." In step 336, the manager then posts the order as received, and the data, as accumulated by the manager on the received order file display (Table 4), is submitted to the central database of the central management 26 (FIG. 1). In step 337, the central database is updated to show that particular order, in this case order number 9842 was received, and in step 338, the invoice amount to be paid to the vendor distribution center is recalculated based upon the order as it was actually marked in as being received by the manager of store 10 in step 334).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Conkel et al., in order to cross-check items that are actually received at the store (see e.g. [0045] ).
Re-claim 6, Inoue et al. teach ---The method of claim 1, comprising causing a user interface to present an indication that the change to the order guide is pending responsive to determining that the change in demand for the product is above a threshold.
(See e.g. [0172] In an example using the data structure diagrammed in FIG. 11(C), when a new item number is stored, and the replacement status is "replacement being implemented," the item replacement is performed. This new item number and replacement status are referenced by the received order item replacing controller indicated in FIG. 6.
[0181] In specific terms, a determination is made as to whether or not the replacement status is implementation in progress. If there placement status is implementation in progress, the new item number is readout, and specified. Following thereupon, from the new item number, merchandise assortment data for that item number are accessed. From that new merchandise assortment data, a price and the like are obtained. Then, from the new item number, the merchandise master is retrieved, and the goods specifications and descriptive images and the like are retrieved. A display is made to the user notifying that the item replacement has been generated.).
Re-claim 8, Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al. teach the functions claimed as in claim 1. Furthermore, the addition of the second order guide, second facility is clearly anticipated by both references.
For example, Conkel et al. teach --The method of claim 1, wherein: initiating the change to the order guide comprises initiating a change to a general order guide that is used to facilitate creation of a first facility order guide that is used to order products for a first facility and a second facility order guide that is used to order products for a second facility;
(see e.g.[0057] The present invention is able to split orders from individual stores 10 over a number of distribution centers or product suppliers.
[0058] Vendor/distribution center module 24 is, essentially, the bidding inputting of what 11 vendors and what supplies are available for the restaurant to order. These have been previously determined by the central office which has requested bids from suppliers for a product for at least a set period of time. --- Through this control mechanism of module 24 central management 26 can prepare order guides for the individual stores 10 which are presented to the individual stores under order entry module 18.)
generating the demand signal comprises generating a first demand signal and a second demand signal based on the change to the general order guide, the first demand signal indicative of a first change in demand for a first product that is provided by a first distribution center that serves the first facility, and the second demand signal indicative of a second change in demand for a second product that is provided by a second distribution center that serves the second facility;
(see e.g. [0039] 18 containing a particular direct order entry number is received by central management 26 whereupon the order is divided across the various different vendors and distribution centers which will be supplying portions of this order to the store, and the order is then transmitted to [0040] those various vendors and distribution centers. The vendors and distribution centers then fill the order of the individual store 10 and deliver the order to the store. Upon arrival of the vendor's truck at store 10 the manager of store 10 locates the appropriate order from the Select Received Order screen shown in Table 3 and selects the order to be received.
[0116] The Order Guide Control Module allows the ordering data displayed to each individual store to be modified and presented to each store 10 individually.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al., and include the second facility as it standard in a supply chain for a retailer to order from several suppliers. As taught by Conkel et al., in order to assure that proper quantities of inventories are maintained in view of impending business demands (see e.g. abstract).
Re-claim 9,---The method of claim 1, comprising: initiating a second change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility; generating a second demand signal based on the second change to the order guide, the demand signal indicative of a second change in demand for a second product that is provided by the distributor; determining that the second change in demand is below a threshold; and implementing the second change to the order guide responsive to determining that the second change in demand is below the threshold.
The claim is a variation of claims 1 and 8 and the same rationale applies. Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al. anticipate a second change to the order guide, which will repeat the steps performed for the first change to the order guide. No unpredictable results are foreseen.
Re-claim 11, Inoue et al. teach -- The method of claim 1, wherein providing the demand signal to the distributor such that the demand signal can be used to facilitate the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor comprises automatically placing a purchase order for the product on behalf of the distributor.
(see e.g. [0115] Then, when an attempt is being made to place an order for an old item number for which item replacement has been defined, the item replacement unit automatically switches the order for that old item over to an order for a new item, wherefore the purchasing management division can switch the purchasing activity of the customer over to a new product or to another product that functions similarly without in any way informing the users of the item number replacement.
[0116] The item replacement control disclosed by this embodiment aspect, moreover, can also be applied in a system not having MD related information. Specifically, even in cases where sales are conducted using a catalog or the like, with the items handled and provided to customers fixed, by determining an automatic replace level for every customer, item replacement can be implemented automatically. In that case, the item replacement controller, when making a replacement of an item stored in the merchandise master to a replaceable item, controls the replacement of items provided to the customers in accordance with the automatic replace level predefined for each of those customers. Thus in a system for providing fixed items using a catalog or the like, for example, situations where it becomes impossible to provide items having that function due to items going out of production can be avoided.)
Re-claim 12, Inoue et al. teach -- The method of claim 1, wherein initiating the change to the order guide comprises initiating the change to the order guide responsive to receiving a user input requesting the change to the order guide from a user device, the method comprising:
receiving a set of login information associated with the user via an application program interface;
responsive to receiving the set of login information, generating a request for authentication data associated with the user, wherein the authentication data includes credentials stored in a unified database; and upon authentication, causing a user interface to be presented to the user via the user device; wherein receiving the user input from the user submitted via the user device comprises receiving the user input from the user via the user interface.
(see e.g. [0134] In the example shown in FIG. 6, the server 10 comprises a login controller 44 for requesting the input of a user ID for identifying a user, password, and a customers management unit ID to which the user belongs, when such user accesses the server. The user is able to log into the server 10 of the distribution supporting system by reading the login page of the distribution supporting system according to the present example and inputting the user ID and customer management unit ID. It is possible to identify the customer management unit to which the login user belongs, and his/her user ID. In this example, the dealer group specifying unit 32 comprises a function for specifying the dealer group capable of providing items to the login user based on customer management unit ID input according to the control of the login controller 44.)
Re-claim 13, Inoue et al. teach -- The method of claim 1, wherein using the order guide to facilitate placement of the order for the product comprises providing the order guide to a procurement system, the procurement system configured to: use the order guide to populate a procurement system user interface that facilitates generation of the order such that the order includes the product that is provided by the distributor; and place the order with the distributor based on a second user input that is received via the procurement system user interface.
(see e.g. [0189] The server 10 based on this embodiment aspect also particularly comprises a free form order controller 80 that, when an order is placed from a customer terminal for an item not stored in the MD related information oriented toward that customer of one or a plurality of dealers, controls the placement or orders or request for an estimate in a free form for the dealer group having the MD related information oriented toward that customer, and a dealer specifying controller 82 for prompting the customer to specify a dealer for providing to that customer an item ordered by the free form order controller 80, or for which an order placement is expected, from a plurality of dealer groups.
[0190] the free form order controller 80 controls the placing of the order or estimate request in a free form for the dealer group having the MD related information oriented toward that customer.)
Re-claim 14, Inoue et al. teach -- The method of claim 1, comprising implementing the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility responsive to receiving an approval of the change to the order guide.
(see e.g. 0027] With the present invention, authorization is sought for the handling of items not in a predetermined merchandise assortment, in an order placing and receiving system that connects customers and dealers with merchandise assortment information, reflecting such a periodic purchase agreement. [0028] When there has been a proposal for a switch to a new product, or the like, there are cases where it is desirable that that be done electronically between the customer and the dealer, or the like, or by direct consultation.)
[0064] Therefore, based on this embodiment aspect, the need for a person in charge in a purchasing management division to make individual responses to individual new product proposals disappears. Also, when the item replacement is contained in conditions for considering individually whether or not to implement the item replacement, if a setting is made so that the item replacement is implemented in cases where the price of the new item has been input by the dealer, for example, the dealer requests a consultation with the customer to discuss that item replacement, and considers whether to implement or not implement the item replacement.)
Re-claim 15, Inoue et al. teach -- The method of claim 1, wherein initiating the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility comprises initiating the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility responsive to receiving a user input requesting the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility from a user device.
(see e.g. (see e.g. [0060] …the replacement of an item (item replacement) has been proposed by a supplier or a dealer or other sales activity entity,…
[0145] In the example diagrammed in FIG. 6, moreover, the out of production item order changing controller 62 references the MD related information, and, when the item number with which the order placement request was received is out of production, urges the user to change or cancel the order placed for that item. In this manner, changes in items after the generation of MD related information can be automatically dealt with.)
Re-claim 16, Inoue et al. teach -- The method of claim 2, wherein initiating the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility comprises automatically initiating the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility responsive to determining that a supplier associated with the first product has stopped supplying the first product.
(see e.g. claim 30. The system according to claim 29, wherein the server further comprises, as a function to be provided to a terminal used by the dealer, an item replacement control function that reflects an item replacement that changes the item going out of production to another item in the MD related information of each purchasing unit of the customer.
[0017] During that period, various situations arise, such as the manufacture of an item of a supplier being suspended, and that item number going out of production, or a change in the customer's business necessitating the placement of an order for a different item, or the necessity of item transactions where goods or service particulars are determined while negotiating with dealers individually.
[0206] It will also be well for the dealer terminal 1D to comprise, as a function provided by the server 10, an out of production effect retrieval function 109 for, in cases where an item stored in the merchandise master has been taken out of production, retrieving the MD related information wherein that item is defined from that database. There are cases where an item is taken out of production by a supplier or by a dealer. An item stored in the merchandise master may be taken out of production, for example, by the supplier suspending manufacture thereof Cases also arise such as where a dealer wishes to replace an item, or where the receiving of orders for some item is urgently needed to be stopped in response to any of various factors. )
Re-claim 17, Inoue et al. do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, Conkel et al. teach -- The method of claim 2, wherein initiating the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility comprises automatically initiating the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility based on a price change associated with the first product.
(see e.g. [0101] The Distributor and Purchasing Module further provides a price change report which shows an increase or decrease in prices from one distributor bid period to another distributor bid period. This information is particularly useful where the restaurant operation controlled by central management 26 is sufficiently large to engage in contract pricing with vendors and distribution centers. This then allows the central management to quickly assess which products have increased or decreased in price and to alert management to the need to revise the pricing of particular items and determine whether or not the cost of a menu item should be increased or decreased.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Conkel et al., in order to alert management to the need to revise the pricing of particular items and determine whether or not the cost of a menu item should be increased or decreased. (see e.g. [0101] ).
Re-claim 18, Inoue et al. teach -- The method of claim 1, wherein initiating the change to the order guide that is used to order products for the facility comprises automatically initiating the change to the order guide based on a group purchasing organization (GPO) contract.
(see e.g. [0036] FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram representing the relationships with customer purchasing units (user groups) of MD related information used in the configuration diagrammed in FIG. 1;
[0054] In this embodiment aspect, the server 10 comprises the item specific ordering controller 14 which, when an order placement request for placing an order for one or a plurality of items is received from a terminal used by a user belonging to a purchasing unit, specifies the dealer or dealers providing those items in that order placement request, based on MD related information for each purchasing unit to which that user belongs. The purchasing unit is a user group which makes purchases from the same dealer under roughly the same conditions according to the department or division, the geographical location, or the authority held by that user, or the like.
[0063] When the conditions under which item replacement is automatically performed (conditions based on automatic replace level) have been determined by the purchasing management division of a customer, for example, if the item replacement proposal satisfies those conditions, there is no need for the person in charge in the purchasing management division of the customer to use any time at all in making a decision at the time the proposal is made. On the other hand, when the conditions under which an item replacement is to be automatically performed have been determined by the purchasing management division of the customer, in cases where the item replacement does not satisfy those conditions, a decision can be made automatically to execute the transaction with the old item irrespective of any proposal of the supplier.)
Claim 19 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 20 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Re-claim 21, Inoue et al. teach --The method of claim 8, wherein the first product and the second product are different products.
(see e.g. [0061] There are cases, for example, where, having the same functions, for an item for which there is no awareness relating to item selection on the customer user end (such as a paper cup for a tea dispenser), or an item for which the supplier is changed according to the season, the dealer switches that supplier for a certain period of time. )
Claim 22 recites similar limitations as claims 8, 9 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Re-claim 23, Inoue et al. anticipate the limitation in at least [0058] “goods responsive to various demands can be made items included in merchandise assortments.”
Conkel et al. teach The method of claim 22, wherein: the change in demand for the product that is provided by the distributor comprises an increase in demand for the product that is provided by the distributor; and the second change in demand for the second product that is provided by the distributor comprises a decrease in demand for the second product that is provided by the distributor.
(see e.g. [0074] as stores become established and their general level of business increases, the Par value for inventory items will need to be raised to contend with the increased demand.
[0077] The Pars module is used to project inventories for managers by examining the increase or decrease in sales for a period of time just preceding the PARS estimate and determining whether sales are up or down and the related percentage. This percentage increase or decrease in sales is then incorporated into the Pars calculations to project for the manager increases or decreases in inventory within the store in view of changes in sales volume).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Conkel et al., in order to avoid overstocking in stores and prevents the holding of needless excess inventory (see e.g. [0074]).
Claims 4, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 20020062260 A1), in view of Conkel et al. ( 2004/0107141 A1), in further view of Dyess et al. (US 20180144428 A1).
Re-claims 4, 5, Inoue et al. do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, Conkel et al. teach -- The method of claim 1, wherein:-determining that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete comprises determining that an inventory level for the product that is provided by the distributor exceeds a threshold inventory level; (see e.g. [0044] ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Conkel et al., in order to cross-check items that are actually received at the store (see e.g. [0045] ).
Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al., do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, Dyess et al. teach -- the method comprises determining the threshold inventory level by applying the change to the order guide to one or more models.
(see e.g. [0184] This price information may be used to dynamically update the prices of products without the need to recreate each pricing model separately. For example, the supplier may update product prices as material and labor costs change. Such a change would result in manually updating each of the pricing models if the prices were stored statically, even though the supplier does not wish to change discount terms for said pricing models.
[0185] In some embodiments, the supplier may add new products to an agreement via a category addendum, such as in the case where the supplier adds new products to their inventory or phases out older products and replaces them with new products. In such circumstances, the system may provide rules to ensure that neither the buyer nor supplier is penalized for introduction of these new products. For example, the system might ensure that any products that are newly added to a product category will not have a negative impact on the buyer's market share calculations for that category. This advantageously allows the buyer to be provided with the option to purchase the new product, without causing a negative impact on the measurement and monitoring terms to which the buyer and supplier previously agreed.
[0186] At action 2914, the method may optionally update the pricing models in accordance with the received updated price information. In this manner, individual pricing models may not store static product prices.
5.--The method of claim 1, wherein providing the demand signal to the distributor comprises providing the demand signal to the distributor responsive to determining that the change in demand for the product is above a threshold.
(see e.g. [0074] as stores become established and their general level of business increases, the Par value for inventory items will need to be raised to contend with the increased demand.
[0077] This information results in a guideline for the manager who will adjust the Par inventory quantities up or down slightly depending on the experience the manager has had and the quantities of an item available to be ordered.
[0116] The Order Guide Control Module allows the ordering data displayed to each individual store to be modified and presented to each store 10 individually. )
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Dye et al., because in this manner, individual pricing models may not store static product prices (see e.g. [0186] and also satisfy the public’s demand (see e.g. [0076]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 20020062260 A1), in view of Conkel et al. ( 2004/0107141 A1), in further view of Ren et al. (US 20110258083 A1).
Re-claim 7, Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al. do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, Ren et al. teach ---The method of claim 1, wherein determining that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete comprises accessing purchase order information for the product via a database associated with the distributor through an application programming interface.
(see e.g. 0129] Moreover, the end user interface 212 includes one or more features, for example, such as searching and viewing a hosted supplier products catalog, invoking purchase/requisition orders, consummating sales transactions, invoking status queries and viewing the response, and setting end user configuration preferences as described further below.
[0159] he result list of the purchase orders are displayed in the display portion 1320 with such information as P.O. number, status of the P.O., priority level of the P.O., the date/time of the submission for approval, the name of the requester, the designated supplier, the amount, and selectable options.
[0659] In some embodiments, a "supplier management system" may be a client or standalone application, not provided by the electronic procurement system 20, that interfaces with the electronic procurement system 20 using a web-browser interface, a database interface, and/or an API interface. In some embodiments, the "supplier management system" may be hosted at the purchasing organization 3712-A or elsewhere, but accessible by the purchasing organization 3712-A.
[0728] FIG. 60 illustrates a system 10300 hosted at a supplier server 10310, which interacts over a network 16 with a plurality of purchaser clients 212, both as described earlier. The purchaser clients run client applications 1532. This application may include a web-browser interface or a stand alone application, for accessing the supplier electronic procurement service 10320, supplier management service 10340, and server 10330. The server 10330 may provide a web/database/API interface 10350 as described earlier. The electronic procurement provider 10320 hosts a plurality of databases 10360, including databases 2200 as described earlier.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Ren et al., in order to facilitate transactions between end users and suppliers. (see e.g.[0102]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al. (US 20020062260 A1), in view of Conkel et al. ( 2004/0107141 A1), in further view of Matsuura et al. (US 20160284013 A1).
Re-claim 10, Inoue et al, ,in view of Conkel et al. do not explicitly teach the limitation as claimed.
However, Matsuura et al. teach --The method of claim 1, comprising maintaining the order guide without implementing the change to the order guide until determining that the change in inventory for the product that is provided by the distributor is complete.
(see e.g. [0062] The contract product information 124 is information for managing products that are currently under contract by the service user and products for which a change order has been received.
[0053] In addition, in a case where the service of an option is to be defined, the service is defined by switching a value in the product attribute.
[0033] The preceding order check processing module 112 is configured to check a dependent relationship between a preceding order and an order determined by the order reception processing module 111 as being receivable. Further, the preceding order check processing module 112 is configured to determine whether or not the order can be executed in parallel, or whether execution of the order needs to wait until completion of the preceding order. The processing performed by the preceding order check processing module 112 is described in more detail later with reference to FIG. 9.
[0083] First, in a case where the order processing finishes, the order completion processing module 114 confirms the contract by changing the contract state 603 in the contract product information 124 to “under contract” (Step 1001).
[0063] For a state currently under contract, the contract state 603 is set to “under contract”. For a state in which a change procedure is being performed, the contract state 603 is set to any one of “new application” in a case where newly adding a product, “changing” in a case where changing only an attribute value of a product which has been under contract, and “cancelled” in a case where cancelling a product under contract.
[0066] Information on the preceding order is stored in the currently-processing order management information 125. In a case where processing a subsequent order, a dependent relationship between the preceding order and the subsequent order is determined by referring to the currently-processing order management information 125. The method of determining the dependent relationship is described based on a flowchart of the preceding order check processing module 112 (FIG. 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Inoue et al., in view of Conkel et al., and include the steps cited above, as taught by Matsuura et al.., in order to maintain consistency (see e.g. abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Katz et al. (US 20020178077 A1)
Hoffman et al. (US 20030069768 A1 )
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUNA CHAMPAGNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7177. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached at 571 272-6790. 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.
/LUNA CHAMPAGNE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
March 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights