DETAILED ACTION
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 .
This Office Action is responsive to: Application filed 13 Sep. 2024
Claims 1-20 are pending in this case. Claims 1, 9 and 16 are independent claims
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3, 6, 8-10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Toffey et al. (Patent No.: US 11,804,057 B1; Filed: Mar. 23, 2023) (hereinafter “Toffey”)
Regarding independent claim 1, Toffey disclose a system for mapping Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) files containing telecommunications data comprising:
software executing on a computer, the software having a plurality of templates accessible thereto, each of the plurality of templates containing mapping instructions for mapping a plurality of data fields comprising telecommunications data, the data fields contained in one or more EDI files (col 2 lines 15-28; col 3 lines 43-55; col 6 lines 35-46; col 7 lines 5-10; col 28 line 49 – col 29 line 8);
the software accessing an EDI file and identifying mapping instructions from two or more of the plurality of templates which allow for mapping different sets of data fields in the EDI file wherein each of the two or more templates allows mapping a different subset of the EDI file (col 2 lines 15-28; col 3 lines 43-55; col 6 lines 35-46; col 7 lines 5-10; col 28 line 49 – col 29 line 8);
said software generating a new template from the identified mapping instructions from the two or more of the plurality of templates which allow for mapping of more of the EDI file than fewer than all of the two or more templates (col 2 lines 15-28; col 3 lines 43-55; col 6 lines 35-46; col 7 lines 5-10; col 28 line 49 – col 29 line 8).
Regarding dependent claim 2, Toffey disclose the system of claim 1 wherein the new template allows mapping of all data fields in the EDI file (col 7 line 43-58).
Regarding dependent claim 3, Toffey disclose the system of claim 1 wherein two or more templates allow for mapping of some data fields which are identical and some data fields with are different (col 7 line 43-58).
Regarding dependent claim 6, Toffey disclose the system of claim 1 wherein the mapping instructions include an aggregator string (col 2 line 1-14; col 17 lines 4-23).
Regarding dependent claim 8, Toffey disclose the system of claim 1 wherein the one or more templates includes at least three templates and each template includes mapping instructions for a portion of the EDI file that others of the at least three templates do not include (col 2 line 1-14; col 5 lines 1-12; col 6 lines 41-46; col 17 line 60-col 18 line 2).
Regarding independent claim 9, Toffey disclose a system for mapping Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) files containing telecommunications data comprising:
software executing on a computer, the software having a plurality of templates accessible thereto, each of the plurality of templates containing mapping instructions for mapping a plurality of data fields comprising telecommunications data, the data fields contained in one or more EDI files, each template associated with at least one telecommunications provider (col 2 lines 15-28; col 3 lines 43-55; col 6 lines 35-46; col 7 lines 5-10; col 28 line 49 – col 29 line 8);
the software accessing an EDI file from a first telecommunications provider and matching one of the plurality of templates to that EDI file, said software further identifying one or more data fields in the EDI file for which the template does not include mapping instructions (col 2 lines 15-28; col 3 lines 43-55; col 6 lines 35-46; col 7 lines 5-10; col 28 line 49 – col 29 line 8);
said software further comprising a robotic process automation (RPA) which identifies one or more standard fields which are not mapped by the matched one of the plurality of templates and comparing the EDI file to those one or more standard fields to identify a correlation between the one or more standard fields and the one or more data fields in the EDI file for which the template does not include mapping instructions to generate augmentation data (col 7 line 27-58);
said software modifying the matched one of the plurality of templates or based on the augmentation data include additional mapping instructions for the identified one or more data fields in the EDI file for which the template did not include mapping instructions prior to modification (col 7 line 27-58).
Regarding dependent claim 10, Toffey disclose the system of claim 9 wherein upon modification, the matched one of the plurality of templates allows mapping of all data fields in the EDI file (col 7 line 43-58).
Regarding dependent claim 14, Toffey disclose the system of claim 9 wherein the mapping instructions include an aggregator string (col 2 line 1-14; col 17 lines 4-23).
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 4, 7, 11, 12 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toffey in view of Watters (Patent No.: US 6,490,718 B1; Filed: May 8, 1996).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 1 wherein the computer is connected to a network and receives the EDI file from a telecommunications provider.
Watters teach wherein the computer is connected to a network and receives the EDI file from a telecommunications provider (col 6 lines 13-35).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Watters with Toffey for the benefit of providing software tools for generating the data processing programs for responding to new data formats that are less time-consuming than existing tools (col 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding dependent claim 7, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 1 further comprising said software generating an output file based on the new template to convert the EDI file from a telecommunications provider format to a uniform format.
Watters teach software generating an output file based on the new template to convert the EDI file from a telecommunications provider format to a uniform format (col 6 lines 13-35; col 9 lines 57-67; col 1 lines 56-67).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Watters with Toffey for the benefit of providing software tools for generating the data processing programs for responding to new data formats that are less time-consuming than existing tools (col 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding dependent claim 11, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 9 wherein the standard field is associated with a uniform format for storage of data from the EDI file in a storage accessible to the computer.
Watters teach wherein the standard field is associated with a uniform format for storage of data from the EDI file in a storage accessible to the computer (col 6 lines 13-35).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Watters with Toffey for the benefit of providing software tools for generating the data processing programs for responding to new data formats that are less time-consuming than existing tools (col 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding dependent claim 12, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 9 wherein the computer is connected to a network and receives the EDI file from a telecommunications provider.
Watters teach wherein the computer is connected to a network and receives the EDI file from a telecommunications provider (col 6 lines 13-35).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Watters with Toffey for the benefit of providing software tools for generating the data processing programs for responding to new data formats that are less time-consuming than existing tools (col 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding dependent claim 15, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 9 further comprising said software generating an output file based on the new template to convert the EDI file from a telecommunications provider format to a uniform format.
Watters teach software generating an output file based on the new template to convert the EDI file from a telecommunications provider format to a uniform format (col 6 lines 13-35; col 9 lines 57-67; col 1 lines 56-67).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Watters with Toffey for the benefit of providing software tools for generating the data processing programs for responding to new data formats that are less time-consuming than existing tools (col 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding independent claim 16, Toffey disclose a method of converting Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) data to a uniform format comprising:
with the software, determining one or more data fields for which the identified template does not contain mapping instructions (col 2 lines 15-28; col 3 lines 43-55; col 6 lines 35-46; col 7 lines 5-10; col 28 line 49 – col 29 line 8);
with the software, obtaining additional mapping instructions from the group consisting of: one or more templates other than the identified template, a robotic process automation (RPA) which identifies one or more standard fields which are not mapped by the matched one of the plurality of templates and comparing the EDI file to those one or more standard fields to identify a correlation between the one or more standard fields and the one or more data fields use of a robot and combinations thereof (col 7 line 27-58);
with the software, modifying the identified template to include the additional mapping instructions (col 7 line 27-58).
Toffey does not expressly disclose accessing one or more EDI files each EDI file associated with one of a plurality of carriers;
identifying a template for each of the one or more EDI files using software executing on a computer, the identified template including mapping instructions for the one of the plurality of telecommunications providers associated with the EDI file to map data fields in the EDI file to a uniform
format.
Watters teach accessing one or more EDI files each EDI file associated with one of a plurality of carriers (col 4 line 57-col 5 line 12);
identifying a template for each of the one or more EDI files using software executing on a computer, the identified template including mapping instructions for the one of the plurality of telecommunications providers associated with the EDI file to map data fields in the EDI file to a uniform
format (col 6 lines 13-35; col 9 lines 57-67; col 1 lines 56-67).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Watters with Toffey for the benefit of providing software tools for generating the data processing programs for responding to new data formats that are less time-consuming than existing tools (col 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding dependent claim 17, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 16 wherein the computer is connected to a network and receives the EDI file from a telecommunications provider.
Watters teach wherein the computer is connected to a network and receives the EDI file from a telecommunications provider (col 6 lines 13-35).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Watters with Toffey for the benefit of providing software tools for generating the data processing programs for responding to new data formats that are less time-consuming than existing tools (col 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding dependent claim 18, Toffey disclose the system of claim 16 wherein upon modification, the matched one of the plurality of templates allows mapping of all data fields in the EDI file (col 7 line 43-58).
Regarding dependent claim 19, Toffey disclose the system of claim 16 wherein the mapping instructions include an aggregator string (col 2 line 1-14; col 17 lines 4-23).
Claims 5, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toffey in view of Pourfallah et al. (Patent No.: US 9,760,871 B1; Filed: Mar. 14, 2013) (hereinafter “Pourfallah”).
Regarding dependent claim 5, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 1 wherein the EDI file includes data related to: one or more device identifiers, usage associated with said one or more device identifiers and a phone number,
Pourfallah teach one or more device identifiers, usage associated with said one or more device identifiers and a phone number (col 4 line 55-col 5 line 2; col 36 lines 5-15; col 40 lines 49-65; col 59 lines 7-23).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Pourfallah with Toffey for the benefit of improving processing efficiency (col 6 line 4-6).
Regarding dependent claim 13, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 9 wherein the EDI file includes data related to: one or more device identifiers, usage associated with said one or more device identifiers and a phone number.
Pourfallah teach wherein the EDI file includes data related to: one or more device identifiers, usage associated with said one or more device identifiers and a phone number (col 4 line 55-col 5 line 2; col 36 lines 5-15; col 40 lines 49-65; col 59 lines 7-23).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Pourfallah with Toffey for the benefit of improving processing efficiency (col 6 line 4-6).
Regarding dependent claim 20, Toffey does not expressly disclose the system of claim 16 wherein the EDI file includes data related to: one or more device identifiers, usage associated with said one or more device identifiers and a phone number.
Pourfallah teach wherein the EDI file includes data related to: one or more device identifiers, usage associated with said one or more device identifiers and a phone number (col 4 line 55-col 5 line 2; col 36 lines 5-15; col 40 lines 49-65; col 59 lines 7-23).
Therefore prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Pourfallah with Toffey for the benefit of improving processing efficiency (col 6 line 4-6).
NOTE
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES J DEBROW whose telephone number is (571)272-5768. The examiner can normally be reached on 09:00 - 06:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Bashore can be reached on 571-272-4088. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center or Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center or the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/James J Debrow/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2174
571-272-5768
Prosecution Insights