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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the amended claims filed on 1/20/26, wherein:
Claims 1, 8, and 12 are amended;
Claims 2-7, 9-11, and 13 remain as original;
Claims 21-27 are new;
Claims 14-20 are cancelled; and
Claims 1-13, and 21-27 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Interpretation
Cancellation of claims 14-20 resolves the interpretation of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR+ 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-13, and 21-27 of Application 18/889934 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over: claims 1-20 of US Patent No. 12125105. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the ‘105 Patent, recite all the limitations of claims 1-13, and 21-27 of the instant Application No. 18/889934 as indicated in the comparison table below.
Claims of 18/889934
US 12,125,105
1. A computer-implemented method for portfolio data structure reduction, the method including:
accessing, by a first processor, a portfolio data structure, the portfolio data structure including data records of obligations between a plurality of participants, the data records of obligations including edges between vertices within a graph data structure; the first processor including an architecture specialized for matrix operations;
traversing, by the first processor, the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex to identify a plurality of paths from a first vertex, at each iteration placing an identified path in a processing stack;
determining, by a second processor different from the first processor, that no more unvisited vertices from the first vertex exist, popping the first vertex from a processing queue for the processor; determining, by the second processor, an optimized notional for each of the plurality of paths;
determining, by the second processor and for each of the plurality of paths in the processing stack, a respective proposed transaction that creates a circular obligation for that path with the optimized notional; sorting, by the second processor, the plurality of proposed transactions based on a first predetermined parameter to apply prioritization to the proposed transactions; selecting, by the processor and based on the prioritization of the proposed transactions, a top priority transaction;
prioritizing, by the second processor, generation of an update message identifying top priority transaction regardless of the maximum notional value determined for any identified circular path elsewhere within the portfolio data structure;
generating, by the second processor, the update message; and
sending, via an electronic communications network, the update message to at least a first participant with an obligation to be altered by the top priority transaction.
1. A computer-implemented method for portfolio data structure reduction, the method including:
accessing, by a first processor, a portfolio data structure, the portfolio data structure including data records of obligations between a plurality of participants, the data records of obligations including edges between vertices within a graph data structure, the first processor including an architecture specialized for matrix operations;
traversing, by the first processor, the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex to identify a plurality of circular paths from a vertex back to that same vertex;
determining, by a second processor different from the first processor, for each of the plurality of circular paths a number of participants with obligations represented along the circular path; determining, by the second processor, for each of the plurality of circular paths a maximum notional value represented along the circular path;
identifying, by the second processor, a first circular path of the plurality of circular paths with a greatest number of participants with obligations represented within vertices among the plurality of circular paths;
determining, by the second processor, a first edge connecting two vertices within the portfolio data structure washing out at least a portion of the first circular path;
prioritizing, by the second processor, a generation of an update message identifying the first edge regardless of the maximum notional value determined for any identified circular path within the portfolio data structure;
generating, by the second processor, the update message; and
sending, via an electronic communications network, the update message to at least a first participant with an obligation represented on the at least a portion of the first circular path.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the predetermined parameter includes a length of the circular obligation for the corresponding proposed transaction and/or a user-defined parameter.
1…determining, by a second processor different from the first processor, for each of the plurality of circular paths a number of participants with obligations represented along the circular path;
3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation quantity for each of the obligations.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation quantity for each of the obligations.
4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation delivery date for each of the obligations.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation delivery date for each of the obligations.
5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein traversing the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex includes generating a path matrix tracking iterative traversal of the portfolio data structure.
8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein traversing the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex includes generating a path matrix tracking iterative traversal of the portfolio data structure.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein the path matrix indicates which of the vertices have been analyzed in previous iterations.
9. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the path matrix indicates which of the vertices have been analyzed in previous iterations.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein the path matrix indicates when all circular paths including a particular vertex of the vertices have been traversed.
10. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the path matrix indicates when all circular paths including a particular vertex of the vertices have been traversed.
8. Non-transitory computer-readable media including instructions stored on the non-transitory computer-readable media, the instructions configured to, when executed, cause a first processor to:
access a portfolio data structure, the portfolio data structure including data records of obligations between a plurality of participants, the data records of obligations including edges between vertices within a graph data structure, the first processor including an architecture specialized for matrix operations;
traverse the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex to identify a plurality of paths from a first vertex, at each iteration placing an identified path in a processing stack; the instructions further configured to cause a second processor different from the first to: determine that no more unvisited vertices from the first vertex exist, popping the first vertex from a processing queue for the processor;
determine an optimized notional for each of the plurality of paths; determine, for each of the plurality of paths in the processing stack, a respective proposed transaction that creates a circular obligation for the path with the optimized notional; sort the plurality of proposed transactions based on a first predetermined parameter to apply prioritization to the proposed transactions; select, based on the prioritization of the proposed transactions, a top priority transaction;
prioritize generation of an update message identifying top priority transaction regardless of the maximum notional value determined for any identified circular path elsewhere within the portfolio data structure;
generate the update message; and send, via an electronic communications network, the update message to at least a first participant with an obligation to be altered by the top priority transaction.
11. Non-transitory computer-readable media including instructions stored on the non-transitory computer-readable media, the instructions configured to, when executed, cause a system to:
access, using a first processor of the system, a portfolio data structure, the portfolio data structure including data records of obligations between a plurality of participants, the data records of obligations including edges between vertices within a graph data structure, the first processor including an architecture specialized for matrix operations;
traverse, using the first processor, the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex to identify a plurality of circular paths from a vertex back to that same vertex;
determine, using a second processor of the system, the second processor different from the first processor, for each of the plurality of circular paths a number of participants with obligations represented along the circular path;
determine, using the second processor, for each of the plurality of circular paths a maximum notional value represented along the circular path; identify, using the second processor, a first circular path of the plurality of circular paths with a greatest number of participants with obligations represented within vertices among the plurality of circular paths;
determine, using the second processor, a first edge connecting two vertices within the portfolio data structure washing out at least a portion of the first circular path;
prioritize, using the second processor, a generation of an update message identifying the first edge regardless of the maximum notional value determined for any identified circular path within the portfolio data structure;
generate the update message; and
send, using the second processor and via an electronic communications network coupled to the system, the update message to at least a first participant with an obligation represented on the at least a portion of the first circular path.
9. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the predetermined parameter includes a length of the circular obligation for the corresponding proposed transaction and/or a user-defined parameter.
11… determine, using the second processor, for each of the plurality of circular paths a maximum notional value represented along the circular path; identify, using the second processor, a first circular path of the plurality of circular paths with a greatest number of participants with obligations represented within vertices among the plurality of circular paths;
10. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation quantity for each of the obligations.
16. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 11, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation quantity for each of the obligations.
11. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation delivery date for each of the obligations.
17. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 11, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation delivery date for each of the obligations.
12. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, wherein the instructions are further configured to cause the processor to traverse the portfolio data structure iteratively by generating a path matrix tracking iterative traversal of the portfolio data structure.
18. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 11, wherein the instructions are further configured to cause the first processor to traverse the portfolio data structure iteratively by generating a path matrix tracking iterative traversal of the portfolio data structure.
13. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 12, wherein the path matrix is configured to indicate which of the vertices have been analyzed in previous iterations.
19. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 18, wherein the path matrix is configured to indicate which of the vertices have been analyzed in previous iterations.
21. An electronic trading system including: a first processor the first processor including an architecture specialized for matrix operations; a second processor; and memory configured to store: first instructions configured to cause the first processor to access, via at least a portfolio data structure, the portfolio data structure including data records of obligations between a plurality of participants, the data records of obligations including edges between vertices within a graph data structure; second instructions configured to cause the first processor to
traverse the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex to identify a plurality of paths from a first vertex, at each iteration placing an identified path in a processing stack; third instructions configured to cause the second processor to determine that no more unvisited vertices from the first vertex exist, popping the first vertex from a processing queue for the processor; fourth instructions configured to cause the second processor to
determine an optimized notional for each of the plurality of paths; fifth instructions configured to cause the second processor to determine, for each of the plurality of paths in the processing stack, a respective proposed transaction that creates a circular obligation for the path with the optimized notional; sixth instructions configured to cause the second processor to sort the plurality of proposed transactions based on a first predetermined parameter to apply prioritization to the proposed transactions; seventh instructions configured to cause the second processor to select, based on the prioritization of the proposed transactions, a top priority transaction;
eighth instructions configured to cause the second processor to prioritize, generation of an update message identifying top priority transaction regardless of the maximum notional value determined for any identified circular path elsewhere within the portfolio data structure;
ninth instructions configured to cause the second processor to generate the update message; and tenth instructions configured to cause the second processor send, via an electronic communications network, the update message to at least a first participant with an obligation to be altered by the top priority transaction
20. An electronic trading system including: a first processor the first processor including an architecture specialized for matrix operations; a second processor; and memory configured to store: first logic configured to, when executed, cause the first processor to access a portfolio data structure, the portfolio data structure including data records of obligations between a plurality of participants, the data records of obligations including edges between vertices within a graph data structure; second logic configured to, when executed, cause the first processor to
traverse the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex to identify a plurality of circular paths from a vertex back to that same vertex;
third logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to determine for each of the plurality of circular paths a number of participants with obligations represented along the circular path; fourth logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to
determine for each of the plurality of circular paths a maximum notional value represented along the circular path; fifth logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to identify a first circular path of the plurality of circular paths with a greatest number of participants with obligations represented within vertices among the plurality of circular paths; sixth logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to determine a first edge connecting two vertices within the portfolio data structure washing out at least a portion of the first circular path; seventh logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to
prioritize a generation of an update message identifying the first edge regardless of the maximum notional value determined for any identified circular path within the portfolio data structure; eighth logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to
generate the update message; and
ninth logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to send, via an electronic communications network, the update message to at least a first participant with an obligation represented on the at least a portion of the first circular path.
22. The electronic trading system of claim 21, wherein the predetermined parameter includes a length of the circular obligation for the corresponding proposed transaction and/or a user-defined parameter.
identify a first circular path of the plurality of circular paths with a greatest number of participants with obligations represented within vertices among the plurality of circular paths; sixth logic configured to, when executed, cause the second processor to determine a first edge connecting two vertices within the portfolio data structure washing out at least a portion of the first circular path;
23. The electronic trading system of claim 21, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation quantity for each of the obligations.
16. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 11, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation quantity for each of the obligations.
24. The electronic trading system of claim 21, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation delivery date for each of the obligations.
17. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 11, wherein the graph data structure includes a weighted graph data structure, the weighted graph data structure weighted in accord with an obligation delivery date for each of the obligations.
25. The electronic trading system of claim 21, wherein the second instructions are further configured to cause the first processor to traverse the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex includes generating a path matrix tracking iterative traversal of the portfolio data structure.
18. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 11, wherein the instructions are further configured to cause the first processor to traverse the portfolio data structure iteratively by generating a path matrix tracking iterative traversal of the portfolio data structure.
26. The electronic trading system of claim 21, wherein the path matrix indicates which of the vertices have been analyzed in previous iterations.
19. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 18, wherein the path matrix is configured to indicate which of the vertices have been analyzed in previous iterations.
27. The electronic trading system of claim 18, wherein the path matrix indicates when all circular paths including a particular vertex of the vertices have been traversed.
19. The non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 18, wherein the path matrix is configured to indicate which of the vertices have been analyzed in previous iterations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13, and 21-27 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the non-statutory double patenting rejections set forth in this Office Action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating Patent-eligible subject matter in view of 35 USC § 101:
The claims recite an abstract idea of portfolio data structure reduction. The claimed limitations cover Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity such as commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts and business relations. Under Step 2A, Prong 2, the claimed invention has been deemed to recite limitations that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The steps in independent claim 1 of: “A computer-implemented method for portfolio data structure reduction, the method including: accessing, by a first processor, a portfolio data structure, the portfolio data structure including data records of obligations between a plurality of participants, the data records of obligations including edges between vertices within a graph data structure, the first processor including an architecture specialized for matrix operations; traversing, by the first processor, the portfolio data structure iteratively by vertex to identify a plurality of paths from a first vertex, at each iteration placing an identified path in a processing stack; determining, by a second [[the]] processor different from the first processor, that no more unvisited vertices from the first vertex exist, popping the first vertex from a processing queue for the processor; determining, by the second processor, an optimized notional for each of the plurality of paths; determining, by the second processor and for each of the plurality of paths in the processing stack, a respective proposed transaction that creates a circular obligation for that path with the optimized notional; sorting, by the second processor, the plurality of proposed transactions based on a first predetermined parameter to apply prioritization to the proposed transactions; selecting, by the processor and based on the prioritization of the proposed transactions, a top priority transaction; prioritizing, by the second processor, generation of an update message identifying top priority transaction regardless of the maximum notional value determined for any identified circular path elsewhere within the portfolio data structure; generating, by the second processor, the update message; and sending, via an electronic communications network, the update message to at least a first participant with an obligation to be altered by the top priority transaction” are limitations, which when considered as an ordered combination, integrates the method of organizing human activity into a practical application. Similar reasoning and rationale apply to independent claims 8 and 21.
Specifically, the claimed limitations of the independent claims address technical problems for efficiently optimizing portfolios from market participants to provide for efficient delivery. The claims recite multiple processors including a first processor specially configured for performing matrix operations that iteratively identifies circular obligations and a second processor that provides for a simplification of specialized data structures by prioritizing top priority transactions based on identified vertices regardless of the maximum notional value determined for identified circular paths that also reduce future calculation complexity and required storage capacity (see specification paras. 0019, 0020, 0024, 0025, and 00103-00106).
For these reasons, independent claims 1, 8 and 21 are deemed patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Dependent claims 2-7, 9-13, and 22-27 are deemed patent eligible by virtue of dependency on an allowed claim.
Examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating Patent-eligible subject matter of the claims over the prior art was previously discussed in the Non-final rejection dated 10/20/2025 and hence not repeated here.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of the amended claims under 35 USC 101 have been fully reconsidered by the examiner. Examiner finds Applicant’s arguments persuasive and the rejections pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 101 have been withdrawn as further stated in the above office action.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul Schwarzenberg whose telephone number is (313) 446-6611. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (7:30-6:30).
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, Christine Behncke, can be reached on (571) 272-8103. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL S SCHWARZENBERG/Examiner, Art Unit 3695 2/24/2026