Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
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. See 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);and, 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-10 and 12-20 of the instant application are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over some claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,137,056.
Regarding claims 1-20, claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,137,056 contain every elements of claims 1-20 of the instant application and as such anticipate claims 1-20 of the instant application. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because modifications are obvious.
Art Rejection
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harris et al., US Pat. No. 11,468,381.
As to claim 1, Harris discloses a server computer system, comprising:
a processor, a communications module coupled to the processor and a memory coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed, configure the processor to:
receive, via the communications module and from a third party server computer system, session data that includes a request to perform an operation (obtaining data regarding the resource providers and track availability of the resources by the resource providers in real time. In particular, each of the resource providers who wants to contribute resources for allocation by the system, see fig. 1, abstract, col.9 lines 30-57);
consult a database to determine that resources are transferable to the third party server computer system to perform the operation based at least on the session data and resource availability data and responsive to determining that the resources are transferable to the third party server computer system to perform the operation, update a graphical user interface displayed on a client device to indicate that the resources are transferable to perform the operation (the resource matcher 114 generates a list of one or more matching resource providers and provides via to the computing device 31 associated with the individual-at-need who requested the resources. The list can be displayed as part of a user interface 32 provided on the computing device 31 either via a web browser or a dedicated application, with the results 34 in such list including the name and address of each of the matching resource provider, see col. 14 lines 4-43).
As to claim 2 Harris discloses obtain the resource availability data for resources maintained by a resource provider (resource matcher) (processing the data submitted by the resource providers and the individuals-at-need and almost instantaneously identify those of the resources that can be accessed by the individual-at-need, see col.14 lines 4-64).
As to claim 3, Harris discloses analyze the resource availability data to obtain an identifier associated with the resource availability data (resource matching, see col.9 line 58 to col. line 15).
As to claim 4, Harris discloses the resource availability data is obtained by way of an application programming interface associated with the resource provider (using API for processing, see col. 13 lines 7-25).
As to claim 5, Harris discloses analyze the session data to obtain an identifier associated with the session data (see col.13 lines 7-25).
As to claim 6, Harris discloses the session data is received by way of an application programming interface redirect initiated by the third party server computer system (API processing, see col.13 lines 7-25).
As to claim 7, Harris discloses receive, from the client device, a signal that includes an identifier for obtaining the resource availability data from the resource provider (processing the data submitted by the resource providers and the individuals-at-need and almost instantaneously identify those of the resources that can be accessed by the individual-at-need, see col.14 lines 4-64).
As to claim 8, Harris discloses enable a selectable option for transferring the resources to perform the operation (matching selection, see col.14 line 4-64).
As to claim 9, Harris discloses responsive to receiving the session data that includes the request to perform the operation, obtain the resource availability data from the resource provider to determine that resources are available to perform the operation (resources matching, see col.11 lines 21-60).
As to claim 10, Harris discloses the request to perform the operation includes a request to transfer resources to an account that is associated with the third party server computer system (matching and processing resources, see col.14 lines 4-64).
Claims 12-20 are rejected for the same reasons set forth in claims 1-3, 7-10 and 1 respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35
U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any
correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will
not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale
supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains.
Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris as in above and in view of Milton et al., US Pub. No.20220060430.
As to claim 11, Harris's teachings still applied as in item 6 above. Harris does not specifically disclose a request to perform the operation includes a pay-by-bank request. However, in the same network environment, Milton discloses a request to perform the operation includes a pay-by-bank request (data source device may be associated with a banking institution providing banking payment accounts, see [0063]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to implement Milton's teachings into the computer system of Harris to process banking payments since it would have provided interactive or dynamically graphical user interfaces for allocation resources associated with networked computing devices.
Conclusion
9. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Khanh Dinh whose telephone number is (571) 272-3936. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.m. to 5:00 P.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Umar Cheema, can be reached on (571) 270-3037. The fax phone number for this group is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for patents
P O Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
/KHANH Q DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458