DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment filed 4 November 2024, for the application filed 31 October 2024, claiming benefit back to 18 September 2012.
Claims 21 – 40 are pending and have been examined.
This action is Non-Final.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7 November 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Continuation
This application is a continuation application of U.S. application no. 18/350,961 filed on 12 July 2023, now U.S. Patent 12,159,245 (“Parent Application”). See MPEP §201.07. In accordance with MPEP §609.02 A. 2 and MPEP §2001.06(b) (last paragraph), the Examiner has reviewed and considered the prior art cited in the Parent Application. Also in accordance with MPEP §2001.06(b) (last paragraph), all documents cited or considered ‘of record’ in the Parent Application are now considered cited or ‘of record’ in this application. Additionally, Applicant(s) are reminded that a listing of the information cited or ‘of record’ in the Parent Application need not be resubmitted in this application unless Applicants desire the information to be printed on a patent issuing from this application. See MPEP §609.02 A. 2. Finally, Applicants are reminded that the prosecution history of the Parent Application is relevant in this application. See e.g., Microsoft Corp. v. Multi-Tech Sys., Inc., 357 F.3d 1340, 1350, 69 USPQ2d 1815, 1823 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (holding that statements made in prosecution of one patent are relevant to the scope of all sibling patents).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 25 – 27, 32 – 34, and 39 – 40 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
It has been held that when the written description does not explicitly disclose a limitation added to a claim, “it must be shown that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood, at the time the application was filed, that the description requires that limitation” (Hyatt v. Boone, 47 USPQ2d 1128). While exact wording of claim (“in haec verba”) is not required, limitations must be supported through express, implicit or inherent disclosure (MPEP 2163.I.B. and II.A.3(b)).
Claim 25 recites wherein the displayed one or more data objects includes an interactive object for submitting a change request in one or more of a quoting application or an order application, however Examiner is unable to find support for the claimed limitations in Applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
Examiner is unable to find any description, either explicit or inherent, or discussion of a change request, nor any interactive object for submitting said.
Further Examiner is unable to find any description, either explicit or inherent, or discussion of a quoting application or an order application. For example, while the following paragraphs recite ‘quote’ or ‘quoting’, they describe the quotes as being a database table, not an application:
[0063] FIG. 3 illustrates a block diagram of an embodiment of a business management app 300 (e.g., a dealpath app) for methods of managing business deals (see also 202 in FIG. 2), which may include embodiments of GUI 302, setup routines 304, contacts 306, tasks 308, Deal Space 310, events 312, files 314, calendar 316, quotes 318, invoices 320, my deals 322, upgrade 324, email application 326, leads 328, reports 330, accounts 332, reminder generator 334, dashboards 336, opportunities 338, productivity apps 340, instant messenger 342, private messaging 344, lead management 346, mass email templates 348, social media monitoring 350, additional storage 354, and security 356. The elements previously listed will be discussed in detail subsequently in the specification. In other embodiments, system 300 may not have all of the elements or components listed above and/or may have other elements or components instead of or in addition to those listed.
[0072] Quotes 318 may be a database table, and may store information about any type of monetary quote that has been given to a client for any product or service. The quote 318 may include the maximum or minimum limit on quantity and price. Quotes 318 may be accessed by selecting the quotes link or button on a navigation bar or on a page (see, for example, "more" on the side or cross navigation bars in FIGs. 6 and 8).
[0473] Each database may generally be viewed as a collection of objects, such as a set of logical tables, containing data fitted into predefined categories. A "table" is one representation of a data object, and may be used herein to simplify the conceptual description of objects and custom objects. It should be understood that "table" and "object" may be used interchangeably herein. Each table generally contains one or more data categories logically arranged as columns or fields in a viewable schema. Each row or record of a table contains an instance of data for each category defined by the fields. For example, a CRM database may include a table that describes a customer with fields for basic contact information such as name, address, phone number, fax number, etc. Another table might describe a purchase order, including fields for information such as customer, product, sale price, date, etc.
Claim 26 recites The system of claim 25, wherein an update includes data indicative of the change request for approval, however Examiner is unable to find support for the claimed limitations in Applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
In addition to the discussion in claim 25, Examiner is unable to find support for a change request, and Examiner cannot find any mention of ‘data indicative of the change request for approval’, or any mention of an approval within any update, and there is no description of any update being tied to any change or request or approval.
Claim 27 recites The system of claim 26, the database system further configurable to cause: responsive to interaction with an interactive data object displaying the change request, communicating the approval to an application platform hosting the different applications, however Examiner is unable to find support for the claimed limitations in Applicant’s originally filed disclosure.
In addition to the discussion in respect to claims 25 and 26, Examiner is unable to find support for an interactive data object displaying the change request nor any communication of an approval, nor can Examiner find any support for any communicating of the approval to any application platform.
The only mention of ‘approval’ appears in [0434], which states: “In FIG. 99, Renee gets a message from Madison Rigsby at Salesforce that "Madison Rigsby requested approval for a discount Im ago". The message is shown to Renee as a reminder”.
Merely receiving a message in which an employee requests a discount approval is not the same as the claimed “responsive to interaction with an interactive data object displaying the change request, communicating the approval to an application platform hosting the different applications”.
Claims 32 – 34 recite substantially similar limitations to those found in claims 25 – 27, and claims 39 – 40 recite substantially similar limitations to those found in claims 25 and 26, and have the same deficiencies under 35 USC 112(a), and are rejected using the same rationale.
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 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 21 – 24, 28 – 31, and 35 – 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being disclosed by Jenkins et al. (U.S. 2009/0249446, hereinafter Jenkins).
.
In respect to claim 21, Jenkins discloses a system for sales and order management comprising:
a database system implemented using a server system comprising one or more hardware processors ([0104] A system to provide content flow across processes is shown schematically in FIG. 1. As shown in FIG. 1, the exemplary system 100 includes a plurality of clients 102 used by various individuals in a first department, a plurality of clients 104 used by various individuals in a second department, one or more servers 106 and databases 108. The clients 102 and 104, servers 106, and databases 106 communicate using one or more data communications networks 110; [0197] The systems and methods described herein are not limited to a hardware or software configuration; they can find applicability in many computing or processing environments. The systems and methods can be implemented in hardware or software, or in a combination of hardware and software. The systems and methods can be implemented in one or more computer-readable storage medium (including computer programs), in which a medium/computer program can be understood to include one or more processor-executable instructions. The computer programs can execute on one or more programmable processors, and can be stored on one or more storage media readable by the processor, comprising volatile and non-volatile memory and/or storage elements), the database system configurable to cause:
combining a plurality of interactive interface elements1 for accessing a plurality of different sales and order management applications in a composite user interface (UI) to include one or more data objects of the different applications ([0178] In another embodiment, a UI modeler 922 is provided by design-time environment 920. UI modeler 922 communicates with IDE 912 through service provider interface 923 to support the development and integration of user Interface models. UI models are used to render virtual folder models 800 for display within applications. The rendering of virtual folder models 800 is by necessity specific to the application development framework in which the model is to be displayed. A UI model designed using UI modeler 922 may be stored in model storage 936 through model repository manager 934 so that it may be effectively shared during design; and subsequently discovered, consumed, and used for rendering of virtual folder model 800 during run-time execution of applications. Thereby, applications developed using the same application development framework may share the same UI model for a given virtual folder model 800. UI modeler 922 also enables application developers to relate UI models for different application development frameworks to further encourage consistency across applications regardless of the development framework under which they were developed.…; [0181] FIGS. 13a and 13b depict two exemplary business productivity applications accessible from client computers 1300 and 1310. The user of computer 1300 is performing Customer Service activities automated with Customer Service Automation Application Software 1301, which has standard components 1302 designed by the vendor of said application software. The user of computer 1310 is performing Sales activities automated with Sales Force Automation Application Software 1311, which has standard components 1312 designed by the (different) vendor of said application software. ;
generating a UI component configurable to display, for a user of the different applications, a set of the interactive interface elements determined according to an authorization status of the user ( [0117] … Document Connect engine 644 relies on the common authentication service 650 to ensure that users 500 and 550 access only the data and content that they have permissions to access through their individual access grants or through access granted to a group or role in which they are authorized to participate; [0181] FIGS. 13a and 13b depict two exemplary business productivity applications accessible from client computers 1300 and 1310. The user of computer 1300 is performing Customer Service activities automated with Customer Service Automation Application Software 1301, which has standard components 1302 designed by the vendor of said application software. The user of computer 1310 is performing Sales activities automated with Sales Force Automation Application Software 1311, which has standard components 1312 designed by the (different) vendor of said application software. [0182] Using the design time environment 920 of the FIG. 9, each of these business productivity applications can be extended to include access to related content from various sources and stored in various repositories. The designer of productivity application #1 has embedded a user interface component 1304 that renders for display a UI model designed using UI Modeler 920 which renders for display a Customer Service-oriented virtual folder model 1306 that was modeled using Virtual Folder Modeler 926. The Customer Service-oriented virtual folder model 1306 has been designed to reference several content models designed using Content Modeler 924, including the Orders content model 1308, which renders for display the orders belonging to a selected customer...);
responsive to a request from a client device of a first user, providing data configured to display, by the client device, a first instance of the UI component2 having a first set of the interactive interface elements determined according to a first authorization status associated with an identity of the first user ([0181] FIGS. 13a and 13b depict two exemplary business productivity applications accessible from client computers 1300 and 1310. The user of computer 1300 is performing Customer Service activities automated with Customer Service Automation Application Software 1301, which has standard components 1302 designed by the vendor of said application software. The user of computer 1310 is performing Sales activities automated with Sales Force Automation Application Software 1311, which has standard components 1312 designed by the (different) vendor of said application software; [0185] Because the components 1304 and 1314 interact with the ECM Flow Manager 600 system through a services oriented interface any changes made to the underlying content models 1308 and 1320 or to the virtual folder models 1306, 1316 and 1318 are dynamically reflected in the productivity applications 1301 and 1311 when UT components 1304 and 1314 are rendered for display. In the prior art, such changes would require recompilation of each application); and
responsive to a first user interaction with a first interactive interface element of the first instance of the UI component, displaying one or more data objects retrieved via an associated one of the different applications ([0185] Because the components 1304 and 1314 interact with the ECM Flow Manager 600 system through a services oriented interface any changes made to the underlying content models 1308 and 1320 or to the virtual folder models 1306, 1316 and 1318 are dynamically reflected in the productivity applications 1301 and 1311 when UT components 1304 and 1314 are rendered for display. In the prior art, such changes would require recompilation of each application. [0186] FIG. 14a shows that the component rendered in the productivity application 1411 may include controls 1420 1416 1418 providing access to the actions available to the user at any node as configured in the content model or the virtual folder model. The actions may be presented to the user in a dropdown menu 1440 as by clicking on the control 1420 displayed next to the node. If desired, the actions may be presented to the user in a menu 1416 outside the folder display as at the top of the component. A further embodiment is to present the actions ( or selected actions as configured for the component) as buttons 1418 outside the folder display).
In respect to claim 22, Jenkins discloses the system of claim 21, the database system further configurable to cause: responsive to user interaction with the displayed one or more data objects, transmitting, to a client device, an update associated with the user interaction with the displayed one or more data objects ([0185] Because the components 1304 and 1314 interact with the ECM Flow Manager 600 system through a services oriented interface any changes made to the underlying content models 1308 and 1320 or to the virtual folder models 1306, 1316 and 1318 are dynamically reflected in the productivity applications 1301 and 1311 when UT components 1304 and 1314 are rendered for display. In the prior art, such changes would require recompilation of each application.; [0137] Object properties 740 refer to attributes of the objects that may vary with individual object instances as well as with the object type. Object properties may be simple attributes, such as a classification value. In some content management systems, object properties may be arbitrarily complex, multi-level, multi-value, language varying attributes grouped into multi-level, multi-value sets. In some embodiments, a mechanism may be provided to map, display, and even update one or more object properties).
In respect to claim 23, Jenkins discloses the system of claim 22, the database system further configurable to cause: associating the update with a second interactive interface element of a second instance of the UI component3 (see FIGs 13a and 13b, noting multiple instances of the UI components).
In respect to claim 24, Jenkins discloses the system of claim 23, the database system further configurable to cause: responsive to user interaction with the second interactive interface element, displaying the update (see FIGs 13a and 13b, noting multiple instances of the UI components; [0137] Object properties 740 refer to attributes of the objects that may vary with individual object instances as well as with the object type. Object properties may be simple attributes, such as a classification value. In some content management systems, object properties may be arbitrarily complex, multi-level, multi-value, language varying attributes grouped into multi-level, multi-value sets. In some embodiments, a mechanism may be provided to map, display, and even update one or more object properties).
Claims 28 – 31, and 35 – 37 recite a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-readable program code, and a method, respectively, performing the same steps as those found in claims 21 – 24, and are rejected using the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 25 – 27, 32 – 34, and 39 – 40 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jenkins et al. (U.S. 2009/0249446, hereinafter Jenkins) in view of McDougall et al. (U.S. 2012/0296842, hereinafter McDougall).
In respect to claim 25, Jenkins discloses the system of claim 21, however Jenkins may not explicitly disclose wherein the displayed one or more data objects includes an interactive object for submitting a change request in one or more of a quoting application or an order application.
McDougall discloses wherein the displayed one or more data objects includes an interactive object for submitting a change request in one or more of a quoting application or an order application ([0092] Users are able to request changes to the data stored in the database if they believe that there is an error or if a procedure or technique could be improved. Change requests are made in respect of a specific control sheet using the same user interface. Accordingly, while viewing a control sheet on the control sheet screen 300a or the flowchart screen 300b for which they wish to request a change the user accesses the change request web pages via the control forms menu 314 in the menu bar 306. A change request screen 300e is shown in FIG. 9. The change request screen 300e includes a change request electronic form 500 containing fields which the user fills in to identify the changes he is suggesting. These fields include a client field 502 which receives the name of the organization or of the client organization if the user is an outsourcing agent, a requested by field 504 which receives the name of the user, a status field 506 which indicates the status of the change request (initially "New"), and a date field 508 which receives the date of the request. All of these fields are filled in automatically by the user interface based on the user and the control sheet that was being viewed prior to opening the change request page. The user may then fill in his department in the department field 510 if desired. [0093] The user enters the details of his change request by selecting appropriate options from the drop down menus in the type of change field 512, the reason for change field 514, and the priority field 516 which indicates how quickly the change request should be reviewed or acted on. The user then fills in the amendment details field 518 with a detailed description of the proposed change. This field should be completed sufficiently clearly that a person reviewing the change request could understand precisely what changes are required to the database 12 without having to obtain further information from the user. The change request form 500 also includes a number of fields that are not filled in by the user, but exist as part of the electronic change request form and are automatically filled in once an administrator or quality assurance reviewer has reviewed the change request. In this way, a user can return to the electronic change request form to check whether and when the change request has been reviewed and acted on. These further fields include a review by quality assuror field 520 and an associated date field 522 which receive the name of a quality assuror who reviews the change request and the date of review respectively, a completed by administrator field 524 and an associated date field 526 which receive the name of an administrator who acted on the change request and the date of the change respectively, and a published version field 528 which indicates which version of the control sheet contains the change. Once a user has filled in the required forms in the change request form area 500, he clicks the save button 530 to save the form to the database 12. A change request number is allocated to the form for auditing purposes. A quality assurance reviewer is informed of the change request by an email automatically generated by the user interface application and sent by an email application on the user's computer. Alternatively, the user can click the cancel button 532 to cancel the change request).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the interactive elements of Jenkins the interactive element for submitting a change request as taught by McDougall since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in combination each element would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that it would produce a predictable result of using the elements on the interface to request changes to the data stored in the database, or to make any other change requests.
26, Jenkins and McDougall disclose the system of claim 25, McDougall further disclosing wherein an update includes data indicative of the change request for approval ([0095] Returning to the change request review area 550, the reviewer can change the status of the selected change request as appropriate by clicking on one of the available status buttons. These buttons include a "New" button 572, an "Approve" button 574, a "Cancel" button 576, a "Reject" button 578, and a "Close" button 580. If the status of the selected change request is changed by a reviewer by clicking one of these buttons, a message such as an email message may be automatically generated by the user interface application and sent using an email application on the reviewer's computer to the user who requested the change in order to inform him of the approval or otherwise of his change request).
27, Jenkins and McDougall disclose the system of claim 26, McDougall further disclosing the database system further configurable to cause: responsive to interaction with an interactive data object displaying the change request, communicating the approval to an application platform hosting the different applications ([0095] Returning to the change request review area 550, the reviewer can change the status of the selected change request as appropriate by clicking on one of the available status buttons. These buttons include a "New" button 572, an "Approve" button 574, a "Cancel" button 576, a "Reject" button 578, and a "Close" button 580. If the status of the selected change request is changed by a reviewer by clicking one of these buttons, a message such as an email message may be automatically generated by the user interface application and sent using an email application on the reviewer's computer to the user who requested the change in order to inform him of the approval or otherwise of his change request).
Claims 32 – 34, and 39 – 40 recite a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing computer-readable program code, and a method, respectively, performing substantially similar limitations as those found in claims 25 – 27, and are rejected using the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Gupta; Amit et al. US 20100235505 A1 Syndicated Presence And Activity Feed Federated Via Extended Interoperable Format
Kotler; Matthew J. et al. US 20110314404 A1 Context-Based Task Generation
Defusco; Scott A. et al. US 20130024452 A1 System And Method For Managing PROJECTS
Ellison; Brian Lee et al. US 20100250712 A1 Centrally Managing And Monitoring Software As A Service (Saas) Applications
McConnell; Jager et al. US 20130018956 A1 Methods And Systems For Managing Multiple Timelines Of Network Feeds
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN S MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5288. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10am-6pm. Examiner’s fax phone number is (571) 270-6288.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Beth Boswell can be reached at (571) 272-6737. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALAN S MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625
1 Noting that “interactive interface elements” is not defined or explicitly described or mention in Applicant’s disclosure.
2 Noting that “a first instance of the UI component” is not defined or explicitly described or mentioned in Applicant’s disclosure, as there is no description or mention of any sperate instances of the UI component.
3 Noting that “a second instance of the UI component” is not defined or explicitly described or mentioned in Applicant’s disclosure, as there is no description or mention of any sperate instances of the UI component.
Prosecution Insights