DETAILED ACTION
This Final Office Action is in response to claims on 03/09/2026. Claims 1, 3-6 are pending. The effective filing date is 07/04/2023.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/19/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
slip information matching unit in claim 1 is described as a customer name word processor in Specification [0010].
financial information management calendar provision unit in claim 1 is described by multiple parts, see specification [0083].
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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, and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1- Claims 1, and 3-6 are directed to a financial management system, a system is a statutory category, and passes step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1-The independent claim 1 recites:
A comprehensive financial management system provided by an enterprise resource planning (ERP) program installable on an administrator computer, comprising:
a first financial information collector (additional element to be analyzed in Step 2A, Prong 2) configured to receive first financial information about deposit and withdrawal details for each preset account from a bank server preset and linked to receive information and convert the first financial information into a database (receiving financial information is a fundamental economic principle, as it involves the exchange of financial information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A); additionally, receiving information can be grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
a second financial information collector (additional element to be analyzed in Step 2A, Prong 2) configured to receive second financial information about approval details for each preset card from a card company server preset and linked to receive information and convert the second financial information into a database (receiving financial information is a fundamental economic principle, as it involves the exchange of financial information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A); additionally, receiving information can be grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
a third financial information collector (additional element to be analyzed in Step 2A, Prong 2) configured to receive third financial information about details of electronic tax invoices, electronic invoices, and cash receipts that are supplied or received based on a pre-set management business operator from the National Tax Service server preset and linked to receive information and convert the third financial information into a database (receiving financial information is a fundamental economic principle, as it involves the exchange of financial information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A); additionally, receiving information can be grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
an automatic generation type slip information generator (additional element to be analyzed in Step 2A, Prong 2) configured to generate first automatic generation type slip information including information about a transaction amount and a balance after transaction corresponding to one of a bank name, an account number, a transaction date, a transaction time, a customer name, a withdrawal amount, or a deposit amount based on the first financial information collected through the first financial information collector, generate second automatic generation type slip information including information about a transaction date, a customer name, a business registration number, and an approval amount based on the second financial information collected through the second financial information collector, generate third automatic generation type slip information including information about an invoice issuance date, a customer name, a business registration number, and a total amount based on the third financial information about details of electronic tax invoices collected through the third financial information collector, generate fourth automatic generation type slip information including information about an invoice issuance date, a customer name, a business registration number, and a total amount based on the third financial information about the details of the electronic tax invoices collected through the third financial information collector, and generate fifth automatic generation type slip information including information about a cash receipt date, a customer name, a business registration number, and a purchase amount based on the third financial information about details of cash receipts collected through the third financial information collector (generating a financial decision based on financial information is a fundamental economic principle, as it involves the exchange of financial information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A); additionally, generating something based on information can be analysis, which can be grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
an input generation type slip information generator (additional element to be analyzed in Step 2A, Prong 2) configured to generate input generation type slip information including information about a first slip type corresponding to one of income or expenditure, a slip date, a payment method, a second slip type classified according to a tax type, a customer name, a transaction amount corresponding to one of income or expenditure, deposit and withdrawal transaction dates, an account subject, a construction name, a site name, and a summary based on a signal input by an input device of the administrator computer (generating a financial decision based on financial information is a fundamental economic principle, as it involves the exchange of financial information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A); additionally, generating something based on information can be analysis, which can be grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
a slip information matching unit (additional element to be analyzed in Step 2A, Prong 2) configured to perform a matching operation for pieces of slip information, where the slip information matching unit comprises:
a first customer name word processor configured to perform word processing that connects all letters by ignoring a spacing of each of customer names included in the first automatic generation type slip information to the fifth automatic generation type slip information generated through the automatic generation type slip information generator and the customer name included in the input generation type slip information generated through the input generation type slip information generator, a second customer name word processor configured to perform word processing that excludes letters of Co., Ltd., solidarity, general partnership, limited, limited company, company, incorporated association, foundation, incorporated foundation, agricultural, and agricultural corporation from each of the customer names in which the spacing has been ignored through the first customer name word process, and a slip information automatic matcher configured to match the firs automatic generation type slip information to the fifth automatic generation type slip information with the input generation type slip information for which consecutive identical leers are a preset matching reference number or more based on each of the customer names from which specific letters have been excluded though the second customer name word processor and perform information processing separately according to a number of clips matched, wherein when the number of slips matched as a result of matching is 1, the slip information automatic matcher generates matching end slip information by pairing a pair of one of the first automatic generation type slip information to the fifth automatic generation type slip information and one of the input generation type slip information, which are matched as 1:1, (matching based on financial information is a fundamental economic principle, as it involves the decision making about financial details, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A); additionally, matching can be analysis, which can be grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); and
a financial information management calendar provision unit (additional element to be analyzed in Step 2A, Prong 2) configured to output and provide a calendar displayed to allow the first automatic generation type slip information generated through the automatic generation type slip information generator to correspond to a transaction date in the first automatic generation type slip information by date in the calendar to an output device of the administrator computer (sending out financial information is a fundamental economic principle, as it involves the exchange of financial information, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A); additionally, the output of information can be grouped as a mental process, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)). Therefore, claim 1 does not pass step 2A, prong 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2- The additional elements of claim 1 include an information collector, information generator, a matching unit, an information management calendar provision unit. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the information collector, information generator, matching unit and calendar provision unit are all described in the abstract steps that they perform, and does not give details about the physical structure of the system. In order to be integrated into the practical application, the additional elements must be more than tools to implement the abstract idea under MPEP 2106.05(f). However, when the additional elements are configured to perform the abstract idea, with no details about the physical nature of those elements, each element is understood to be essentially the abstract idea, and that any element that is capable of performing that specific step, such as sending information, can be exchanged, and therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. Therefore, claim 1 does not pass step 2A, prong 2.
Step 2B-The independent claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements do no provide details that would amount to more than the abstract idea. Stating that an information collector, collects information, does not provide more than the idea of collecting information using some sort of device. The device is not given any particular structure, or showcase that the claims are directed to anything beyond the idea. Therefore, independent claim 1 does not pass Step 2B.
Dependent Claims 3-6-add processors and matchers, which continue to provide the exchange of financial information (which is a fundamental economic principle. And also can be a mental process under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)), and the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or provide significantly more than the abstract idea under MPEP 2106.05(f). Therefore, claims 3-6 remain patent ineligible.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding 101, Examiner contacted QAS to further discuss the arguments and claim amendments presented by Applicant. It has been determined that the word processor is being used in its ordinary capacity, to process words, and without specific to how it is able to function better, such as having multiple processors performing different function, it is not more than data analysis.
Step 2A, Prong 1- Applicant asserts the claims are not directed to an abstract idea and proceeds to discuss the specific technical implementation. However, under Step 1A, prong 1, the analysis is if the claim limitation is directed to an abstract idea, so when the claim limitation is the performing of data analysis, a mental process under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), the mode it is being analyzed is to be analyzed in later steps for integration into a practical application.
Step 2A, Prong 2-integration into a practical application is to look at the additional elements to determine if there are scenarios that would integrate the data analysis into a practical application. MPEP 2106.05(d), refers to well-understood, routine, conventional activity, while MPEP 2106.05(a) refers to the improvement to the functioning of a computer. The specification described the technical problem as being the detection of an error in reading of slips. However, this describes a problem in the data analysis, and data analysis is the abstract idea. Therefore, when the problem is the abstract idea, and the improvement is to the abstract idea, the use of computer to perform the data analysis is merely using the computers and word processors as tool to perform the abstract idea. The details added relate to changes in how data is analyzed, but does not indicate how the computer itself would functionally be changed t be an improvement. Enfish and Core Wireless were found patent eligible because of their specifically in how the computer would process the information differently, rather just stating that the application on a computer is a solution, without providing technical details to the solution. The claim also includes multiple generation processors, but using multiple generic processors does not mean the claim is rooted in a specific technical environment. In order to be rooted in a specific technical environment under MPEP 2106.05(h), the claims must showcase more than limiting the reach of the patent to a particular technological use. Therefore, the claims fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B- Under this analysis, it is very similar to Step 2A, Prong 2, in that you look at the additional elements and determine if the claim as a whole is more than the abstract idea. At its core, the claim is directed to a data analysis using a plurality of processors. Those processors are being used as tools to perform the abstract idea, and do not impute significantly more than the abstract idea, as they are described as tool under MPEP 2106.059(f). BASCOM found the use of generic computer elements in a specific order to be patent eligible, however, Examiner notes that the claim does have a two stage pipeline with matching algorithm, but that the use of steps does not constitute significantly more. This is because the arrangement in the instant claims simply performs two algorithms in a row to normalize names, but does not provide a unique arrangement that alters the functioning of the processors, in that is the second in line processor took the data from the first processor, it would perform as expected, just using improved data, and improvements in the data to analyze to have a better outcome does not change how the actual elements perform. Therefore, claim 1 remains patent ineligible.
Claims 3-6 do not rely on patent eligible claim 1, and therefore, remains rejected.
Claim 3-5 adds details to the algorithm for matching, processing of zero-match cases and compares information, which is details to the data analysis, the abstract idea, and does not provide additional elements to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more.
Claim 6-adds the additional element of a display units. Presenting information of a display unit is a method of displaying the results from the analysis and can still be considered a mental process under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). The actual additional elements may have specific uses, such as to display user information, but this does not present a specific user interface that rises the Core Wireless level of the interface being an improvement to the functioning of a computer under MPEP 2106.05(a).
Dependent claims 3-6 remain patent ineligible.
Prior Art
The claim limitations are not found in a single prior art reference, or a combination of references. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2012/0191580 A1 Bhatt teaches creating a financial statement (Abstract).
US 2020/0394723 A1 Baker et al. teaches an enterprise resource planning ([0027]) and includes financial information about details of electronic tax invoices ([0031]).
US 2014/0172687 A1 Chirehdast teaches using financial information for loan approval (Abstract).
US 2008/0133303 A1 Singh et al. teaches facilitating commercial transactions (Abstract), use withdrawal information ([3236]), and creates a slip ([3232]).
The claims remain rejected as patent ineligible under 101.
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 JESSICA E SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9501. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th; 9:00 AM-5PM EST.
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, FAHD OBEID can be reached at (571) 270-3324. 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.
/JESSICA E SULLIVAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FAHD A OBEID/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights