Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/894,815

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MANAGING GRATUITIES

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Sep 24, 2024
Examiner
WILDER, ANDREW H
Art Unit
3627
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Gratuity LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
345 granted / 548 resolved
+11.0% vs TC avg
Strong +59% interview lift
Without
With
+59.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
577
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
30.2%
-9.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
§102
8.5%
-31.5% vs TC avg
§112
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 548 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 30-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 30 and 37 recite “generating… a separate first electronic payroll report” and “receiving… subsequent to generating a first electronic payroll report”. It is unclear if both of these reports are the same reports or different reports. Claims 31-36 and 38-48 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph as being dependent under a claim rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second 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 30-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without “significantly more.” Claims 30-48 are directed to recording and sending transaction information, sending employee information, recording transaction and employee information for the accounting period, recording gratuity distribution information, calculating a first gratuity allocation, generating a first payroll report, receiving at least one updated transaction information, calculating a second gratuity allocation and generating second payroll report which is considered an abstract idea. Further, the claim(s) as a whole, when examined on a limitation-by-limitation basis and in ordered combination do not include an inventive concept. Step 1 – Statutory Categories As indicated in the preamble of the claims, the examiner finds the claims are directed to a process and machine. Step 2A – Prong One - Abstract Idea Analysis Exemplary claim 30 (and similarly claim 37) recites the following abstract concepts, in italics below, which are found to include an “abstract idea”: A method of managing gratuity allocations with a cloud-based gratuity management system, comprising: recording original transaction information for sales at each of a plurality of businesses on respective business computing systems located at each of the plurality of businesses, wherein the original transaction information includes information about sales and associated gratuities paid in connection with those sales; causing the original transaction information for an accounting period for each of the plurality of businesses to be sent from the plurality of respective business computing systems to a cloud-based gratuity management system; causing original employee information for the accounting period to be sent from the plurality of businesses to the cloud-based gratuity management system, where the original employee information for each business indicates the hours worked by a plurality employees of the business during the accounting period; recording the original transaction information for the accounting period sent from the respective plurality of business computing systems in at least one transaction database of the cloud-based gratuity management system; recording the original employee information for the accounting period sent from the plurality of businesses in at least one employee database of the cloud-based gratuity management system; recording gratuity distribution information for each of the plurality of businesses in at least one gratuity rules database of the cloud-based gratuity management system, wherein the gratuity distribution information for each of the plurality of businesses indicates how gratuities are to be allocated to employees of that business; calculating, with the cloud-based gratuity management system, a separate first gratuity allocation for each of the plurality of businesses for the accounting period based on the recorded gratuity distribution information, the recorded original transaction information for the accounting period and the recorded original employee information for the accounting period; generating, with the cloud-based gratuity management system, a separate first electronic payroll report for the accounting period for each of the plurality of businesses, wherein each first electronic payroll report for the accounting period can be electronically submitted to a payroll system, wherein each first electronic payroll report for the accounting period includes information about the calculated first gratuity allocation for the business for the accounting period, and wherein each first electronic payroll report for the accounting period is generated after the first gratuity allocation for the business for the accounting period has been calculated; receiving at the cloud-based gratuity management system, and subsequent to generating a first electronic payroll report for the accounting period for a first business of the plurality of businesses, at least one of updated transaction information for the accounting period for the first business and updated employee information for the accounting period for the first business, where updated transaction information for the first business includes at least one change relative to the original transaction information for the first business and where updated employee information for the first business includes at least one change relative to the original employee information for the first business; calculating with the cloud-based gratuity management system a second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business using at least one of the updated transaction information for the first business and the updated employee information for the first business, wherein the step of calculating the second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business is performed immediately after receiving updated transaction information for the first business or updated employee information for the first business; and generating with the cloud-based gratuity management system a second electronic payroll report for the accounting period for the first business that can be submitted to the payroll system for the first business, wherein the second electronic payroll report for the accounting period for the first business includes information about the calculated second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business and/or differences between the first gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business and the second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business. The claim features in italics above as drafted, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, are mental processes and/or certain methods of organizing human activity performed by generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “a plurality of respective business computing systems”, “a cloud-based gratuity management system,” “at least one employee database”, “at least one transaction database”, “at least one gratuity rules database”, “electronically submitted to a payroll system”, “a first electronic payroll report” and “a second electronic payroll report”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or a method of organized human activity. While Examiner is treating herein each of the recited systems as an additional element, the systems do not necessarily equate to a physical components, i.e. a processor or computer, and are therefore not necessarily additional elements. Further, the payroll report itself is not an additional element, but it being electronic or electronically submitted makes it non-abstract and therefore an additional element. For example, but for the “plurality of respective business computing systems”, “cloud-based gratuity management system,” “at least one employee database”, “at least one transaction database”, “at least one gratuity rules database” and “payroll system” language, “recording original transaction information for sales at each of a plurality of businesses … located at each of the plurality of businesses, wherein the original transaction information includes information about sales and associated gratuities paid in connection with those sales; recording the original transaction information for the accounting period sent from the respective plurality of business …; recording the original employee information for the accounting period sent from the plurality of businesses …; recording gratuity distribution information for each of the plurality of businesses …, wherein the gratuity distribution information for each of the plurality of businesses indicates how gratuities are to be allocated to employees of that business; calculating… a separate first gratuity allocation for each of the plurality of businesses for the accounting period based on the recorded gratuity distribution information, the recorded original transaction information for the accounting period and the recorded original employee information for the accounting period; generating… a separate first … payroll report for the accounting period for each of the plurality of businesses, wherein each first … payroll report for the accounting period can be .. submitted …, wherein each first … payroll report for the accounting period includes information about the calculated first gratuity allocation for the business for the accounting period, and wherein each first … payroll report for the accounting period is generated after the first gratuity allocation for the business for the accounting period has been calculated; calculating … a second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business using at least one of the updated transaction information for the first business and the updated employee information for the first business, wherein the step of calculating the second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business is performed immediately after receiving updated transaction information for the first business or updated employee information for the first business; and generating … a second … payroll report for the accounting period for the first business that can be submitted … for the first business, wherein the second … payroll report for the accounting period for the first business includes information about the calculated second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business and/or differences between the first gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business and the second gratuity allocation for the accounting period for the first business” in the context of this claim encompasses mental processes. If the claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers steps which could be performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement of opinion but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “mental process” grouping of abstract ideas. Further, “causing the original transaction information for an accounting period for each of the plurality of businesses to be sent …; causing original employee information for the accounting period to be sent from the plurality of businesses …, where the original employee information for each business indicates the hours worked by a plurality employees of the business during the accounting period; receiving …, and subsequent to generating a first … payroll report for the accounting period for a first business of the plurality of businesses, at least one of updated transaction information for the accounting period for the first business and updated employee information for the accounting period for the first business, where updated transaction information for the first business includes at least one change relative to the original transaction information for the first business and where updated employee information for the first business includes at least one change relative to the original employee information for the first business” in the context of this claim encompasses certain methods of organizing human activity. If the claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a fundamental economic practice, commercial or legal interaction or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. Step 2A – Prong Two - Abstract Idea Analysis This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites five additional elements – “a plurality of respective business computing systems”, “a cloud-based gratuity management system,” “at least one employee database”, “at least one transaction database”, “at least one gratuity rules database”, “electronically submitted to a payroll system”, “a first electronic payroll report” and “a second electronic payroll report”. The “plurality of respective business computing systems”, “cloud-based gratuity management system,” “at least one employee database”, “at least one transaction database”, “at least one gratuity rules database”, “electronically submitted to a payroll system”, “first electronic payroll report” and “second electronic payroll report” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.05(f), i.e. the recording, causing (sending), calculating and generating steps) and data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g), i.e. the receiving step). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. Step 2B - Significantly More Analysis 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 “a plurality of respective business computing systems”, “a cloud-based gratuity management system,” “at least one employee database”, “at least one transaction database”, “at least one gratuity rules database”, “electronically submitted to a payroll system”, “a first electronic payroll report” and “a second electronic payroll report” amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and insignificant extra-solution activity. Mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and insignificant extra-solution activity cannot provide an inventive concept. Further, the background does not provide any indication that the “plurality of respective business computing systems”, “cloud-based gratuity management system,” “at least one employee database”, “at least one transaction database”, “at least one gratuity rules database”, “electronically submitted to a payroll system”, “first electronic payroll report” and “second electronic payroll report” are anything other than a generic, off-the-shelf computer components. For these reasons, there is no inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hunter Wilder whose telephone number is (571)270-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5:30PM. 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. /A. Hunter Wilder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 24, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597001
BILL SPLITTING AND PAYMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586106
COMPREHENSIVE LIABILITY MANAGEMENT PLATFORM FOR CALCULATION OF MULTIPLE ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586050
SALES DATA PROCESSING METHOD AND SALES DATA PROCESSING TERMINAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586040
Whiteboard Event Compliance
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12566841
Secure Environment Public Register (SEPR)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+59.3%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 548 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month