DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/26/2025 has been entered.
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, 3-9, 11-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims do not provide significantly more than the judicial exception under the subject matter eligibility two-part statutory analysis, as provided below.
Regarding Step 1,
Step 1 addresses whether the claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter according to MPEP §2106.03. Claims 1 and 9 recite a system (apparatus/machine) and the respective dependent claims, all fall within a statutory category.
Regarding Step 2A [prong 1],
The claimed invention recites an abstract idea according to MPEP §2106.04. Independent claim 1, also representative of independent claims 9 for the same abstract features, is underlined below which recite the following claim limitations, as an abstract idea.
Claims 1 & 9: …facilitating student athlete recruitment comprising:
receive a first message … associated with a first user, the first user being one of a player user, a team user, a recruiter user, and a fan user, the first message comprising live scoring data describing a sporting event;
identify a game data … associated with the sporting event being described in the first message, the game data being referenced by at least one of a player record and a team record;
update the game data to reflect the live scoring data;
receive a second message … associated with a second user different from the first user, the second message comprising an approval of the first message or live scoring data describing the sporting event that overlaps, at least in part, with the live scoring data of the first message;
validate the live scoring data associated with both the first message and the second message by determining that the second message is the same as the live scoring data belonging to the first message; and
update the game data to include validated scoring data; wherein updating the game data occurs contemporaneous with the sporting event;
wherein the at least one of a player record and a team record referencing the game data object only refers to validated scoring data.
The underlined claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, fall under “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities” grouping of abstract ideas, and includes at least managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). See MPEP §2106.04(a)(2)(II).
But for the recitation of generic implementation of computer system components, the claimed invention merely recites a process for managing personal behavior/relationships or interactions between people because the claimed steps recite receiving/determining scoring data of a sporting event, identifying game data, as well as validating the scoring data, and updating the game data to include validated scoring data for a live sporting event. Accordingly, since the claimed invention describes a process that falls under “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activities” grouping, the claimed invention recites an abstract idea.
Alternatively, the underlined claim limitations recite “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas, which can practically be performed in the human mind and/or with the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper. The use of a physical aid (e.g., pencil and paper) to help perform a mental step (e.g., a mathematical calculation) does not negate the mental nature of the limitation. The limitations recite a mental-process type abstract idea as they can be accomplished by including an observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion based on determining a score of a sporting event, identifying game data, as well as validating/confirming the score for the game, and updating the game data to include validated score data for a live sporting event.
Regarding Step 2A [prong 2],
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application according to MPEP §2106.04(d). Claims 1 and 9 include the following additional elements:
A system comprising: a server having a processor that is communicatively coupled to a memory, a storage, and a network interface, the network interface communicatively coupled to a network, and the server configured to:
a first client device communicatively coupled to the server through the network;
identify a data object within the storage;
a second client device communicatively coupled to the server through the network;
In particular, the additional elements cited above beyond the abstract idea are recited at a high-level of generality and simply equivalent to a generic recitation and basic functionality that amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer technology components.
The claimed invention merely provides an abstract-idea-based-solution implemented with generic computer processes and components recited at a high-level of generality (receiving, storing, determining, and comparing data) using computer instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer, and merely “apply it” without any meaningful technological limits or any improvement to technology, technical field or improvement to the functioning of the computer itself.
Additionally, receiving first and second messages (data) and updating the game data within the storage amounts to data gathering and selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated, thus does not add any meaningful limitations, and since receiving, storing and transmitting data is considered one of the most basic functions of a computer, these additional elements are deemed as insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. The legal precedent in Electric Power Group and Ultramercial cited in MPEP 2106.05(g) indicate that selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information for collection, analysis and display, and requiring a request from a user to view an advertisement and restricting public access, are all insignificant extra-solution activity.
Therefore, the additional elements fail to integrate the recited abstract idea into any practical application since they do not impose any non-generic meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus, the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea.
Regarding Step 2B,
The claimed invention does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. See MPEP §2106.05.
As discussed above, the claimed additional elements recited above amounts to no more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea by adding the words “apply it” using generic computer components and functionality. See MPEP §2106.05(h). Mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components are insufficient to provide an inventive concept. Furthermore, the claimed additional elements merely limit the abstract idea to be executed in a computer environment, thus do nothing more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. See MPEP §2106.05(h).
Additionally, re-evaluating the insignificant extra-solution activities listed above, it is determined that they are also well-understood, routine, and conventional, as well. See MPEP 2106.05(d). The legal precedent in Ultramercial, Versata, Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that storing and retrieving information in memory, as well as receipt and transmission of information over a computer network, and updating an activity log are a well-understood, routine, and conventional functions claimed in a generic manner, as is the case here. As explained by the Supreme Court, the addition of insignificant extra-solution activity does not amount to an inventive concept, particularly when the activity is well-understood or conventional. See Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 588-89, 198 USPQ 193, 196 (1978).
Considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements are claimed at a high-level of generality and add nothing that is not already present when the steps are considered separately. The sequence of the claimed limitations is equally generic and otherwise held to be abstract since the combination of these additional elements is no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components operating in their ordinary and generic capacities of what is typically expected of computers storing and updating data, and receiving and transmitting data between generic computer devices. The claimed invention is not patent eligible because the additional elements are merely invoked as generic tools in a generic arrangement to execute the abstract idea without any technical improvement and thus are insufficient to amount to an inventive concept significantly more than the judicial exception.
The dependent claims 2-8 and 10-20 merely further narrow and reiterate the same abstract ideas for storing and updating data, and receiving and transmitting data using generic data storage and transmittal techniques with the same additional elements as recited above which provide nothing more than applying the abstract idea using generic computer technology components. Furthermore dependent claims 2-8 and 10-20 comprise the following additional elements: An interface and a third client device.
These additional elements do not provide any improvement to technology, technical field or improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, and at best simply applying the abstract idea executed in a general-purpose computer environment. Therefore the dependent claims are also directed to ineligible subject matter since they do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Thus, after considering all claim elements in Claims 1-20 both individually and as an ordered combination, it has been determined that the claimed invention as a whole, is not enough to transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention since nothing in the claim limitations provide significantly more than the abstract idea under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 3-9, 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BLACKMON (US 2024/0378563) in view of LOCKE (US 2013/0321388).
Regarding Claims 1 & 9,
Blackmon teaches: A system for facilitating student athlete recruitment (Abstract; athlete recruitment platform) comprising: a server having a processor that is communicatively coupled to a memory, a storage, and a network interface, the network interface communicatively coupled to a network (Figs. 1-10, system 100, network 102, [0024-0026] server, network interface, [0036] application programming interfaces (APIs), [0006] processor, [0105] memory, storage, [0111-0113]) configured to:
receive a first message from a first client device communicatively coupled to the server through the network, the first client device associated with a first user, the first user being one of a player user, a team user, a recruiter user, and a fan user, the first message comprising live scoring data describing a sporting event ([0023-0024] The recruitment platform 110, the prospective athletes 120, the sports coach 130, the statistician 140, and/or the evaluator 150 in communication with one another via the one or more networks 102. The system 100 includes one or more networks 102, the recruitment platform 110, a plurality of prospective athletes 120, a sports coach 130, a statistician 140, and an evaluator 150, having devices for communication in the form of emails, direct messages, and text messages, [0071-0074] While attending the athletics competition, the statistician 140 or user may use the computing device 141 (e.g., via its application) to collect, provide, and record event tracking data [live scoring data] in real-time for the athletics competition to the application via the computing device 141, [0082] the computing device 141 may transmit the event tracking data [live scoring data] for the event to the recruitment platform 110 in real-time);
identify a game data object within the storage that is associated with the sporting event being described in the first message, the game data object being referenced by at least one of a player record and a team record ([0072] The event tracking data may correspond to a log including a data entry and event data, [0030] each of the plurality of prospective athletes 120 shown is a member of the same sports team, [0082-0084] After receiving the event tracking data [live scoring data] from the computing device 141, the recruitment platform 110 may store the event tracking data [live scoring data] in the one or more databases of the platform 110, the recruitment platform 110 may determine event statistics data for the athletics competition based on the event tracking data. Specifically, for the data entry, the platform 110 may determine and/or extract one or more data values with respect to one or more statistical categories for each prospective athlete 120. These data values may correspond to the event statistics data for each athlete 120 with respect to the received data entry. The recruitment platform 110 may store the event statistics data in the one or more databases of the platform 110 and use the event statistics data to identify and update the athlete profile data for each prospective athlete 120 based on the received event statistics data in real-time, [0073] the event tracking data for a high school basketball game may include a data entry provided by the statistician 140 for Team A, [0087] upon obtaining the event tracking data and/or the event statistics data, the recruitment platform 110 may generate a real-time visual representation, including symbols, markers, data values etc. of the athletics competition, where the visual representation of the event data may be linked to and accessible from the coach profile for the sports coach 130 and athlete profile 120);
update the game data object to reflect the live scoring data ([0087] The recruitment platform 110 may generate [update] real-time event data of the competition, [0083-0084] After determining the event statistics data for each prospective athlete 120 for the received data entry and the event tracking data, the recruitment platform 110 may update the athlete profile data for each prospective athlete 120 based on the determined event statistics data. In particular, the athlete profile data for each prospective athlete 120 may be updated to incorporate the newly determined event statistics data [reflect live scoring data]. In some implementations, the recruitment platform 110 may update the athlete profile data for each prospective athlete 120 in real-time or near real-time);
receive a second message from a second client device communicatively coupled to the server through the network, the second client device associated with a second user different from the first user, the second message comprising an approval of the first message or live scoring data describing the sporting event that overlaps, at least in part, with the live scoring data of the first message (Examiner interprets the second message/data comprising live scoring data as the second instance of live scoring data updated from a second client device which is encompassed in [0083-0084] The recruitment platform 110 may update the athlete profile data for each prospective athlete 120 based on the determined event statistics data, [0087-0088] Upon obtaining the event tracking data and/or the event statistics data, the recruitment platform 110 may generate [update] a real-time visual representation of the athletics competition, where the visual representation of the event data may be linked to and accessible from the coach profile for the sports coach 130 and athlete profile 120. The evaluator 150 may also receive and analyze event statistics data [live scoring data] recorded for the prospective athlete 120, see also [0023-0024]);
Although Blackmon discloses all of the limitations above including updating live scoring data in real-time and under BRI would encompass as validating the live scoring data since the claim does not specify how validation is being implemented in any specific manner, which could reasonably include each time the score data is updated from a user (statistician and evaluator or coach) it is validated without any details regarding any specific validation process required.
Nonetheless, under a more conservative interpretation, Blackmon may not explicitly specify actually validating per se other than updating the live scoring data, yet analogous art, Locke directed a live event reporting system, specifically discloses:
validate the live scoring data associated with both the first message and the second message by determining whether the second message is the same as the live scoring data belonging to the first message ([0054] A system configured to track, organize, report, and edit statistics for one or more teams. For instance, the live event information reporting application 140 may operate as a scoring system for a statistics tracking and reporting system or a live event information management system, [0081] live event information reporting system 100 may allow users for reporting a live event, especially if there are multiple requests to report an event based on metrics or quality characteristics such as accuracy (e.g., based on a review of the reported information), providing user feedback (e.g., live event viewing user interface 144 users may provide feedback for live event reporters and feedback from live event information reporting system 100 administrators), [0084] accept a confirmed reporting request for a user that has successfully reported the live event data, [0042] content displayed on the live event reporting interface 142 and the live event viewing interface 144 may also include team data and player data, [0058] Multiple users, such as in a crowdsourcing arrangement, may simultaneously report live event information, including, without limitation, scores, commentary, text, differing viewpoints (e.g., different perspectives on a particular play or participation in a debate), and live events from users can be reported to confirm the accuracy and consistency of the live event information being submitted. Certain users with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information); and
update the game data object to include validated scoring data; wherein updating the game data object occurs contemporaneous with the sporting event ([0022] a user interface to provide an efficient process for any user to enter real-time information via a mobile computing device while attending a particular event. For example, a user interface may be customized for reporting updated scores of a football game, with reporting elements specific for the football game, including additional attributes such as touchdowns, field goals, and pass play information. The reported score and relevant information may be transmitted to a content consumer, a database, an Internet content provider, or a media service, to provide real-time information for events, and this real-time information may be provided to users in real-time, [0054] if a user reports via a live event reporting user interface 142 a score update (i.e., live event information 180-e) for a live event football game, the live event information component 220-3 may receive the score update and store the live event information 180-e in a database 190-h, [0061] For instance, a user may indicate that a particular team scored a 2-point basket by selecting a button for the team, selecting a button to indicate that number of points scored, and a third button to update the score for the team and with the number of points selected through the event information elements 230-j, [0068] users can update the score to the live event or adjust a reported score (e.g. a penalty) and allow a user to change a reported score, [0058] Certain users with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information);
wherein the at least one of a player record and a team record referencing the game data object only refers to validated scoring data ([0022] a user interface to provide an efficient process for any user to enter real-time, [0054] if a user reports via a live event reporting user interface 142 a score update (i.e., live event information 180-e) for a live event football game, the live event information component 220-3 may receive the score update and store the live event information 180-e in a database 190-h, [0061] For instance, a user may indicate that a particular team scored a 2-point basket by selecting a button for the team, selecting a button to indicate that number of points scored, and a third button to update the score for the team and with the number of points selected through the event information elements 230-j, [0068] users can update the score to the live event or adjust a reported score (e.g. a penalty) and allow a user to change a reported score, [0058] Certain users with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective
filing date of the invention, to modify the scoring process of Blackmon and further incorporate validating and updating live scoring data to reflect validated scoring data, as taught by Locke. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the features of the live event reporting application of Locke in order to “control the accuracy, consistency, and cohesiveness of the live event information being submitted to the live event information reporting system.” (Locke; 0022]).
Regarding Claim 11,
Modified Blackmon further discloses player and team records referencing the game data object including updated live scoring data (Blackmon; [0082-0084]), however, Blackmon may not explicitly specify that the game data object only refers to validated scoring data, yet Locke specifically discloses:
wherein the at least one of a player record and a team record referencing the game data object only refers to validated scoring data ([0022] a user interface to provide an efficient process for any user to enter real-time, [0054] if a user reports via a live event reporting user interface 142 a score update (i.e., live event information 180-e) for a live event football game, the live event information component 220-3 may receive the score update and store the live event information 180-e in a database 190-h, [0061] For instance, a user may indicate that a particular team scored a 2-point basket by selecting a button for the team, selecting a button to indicate that number of points scored, and a third button to update the score for the team and with the number of points selected through the event information elements 230-j, [0068] users can update the score to the live event or adjust a reported score (e.g. a penalty) and allow a user to change a reported score, [0058] Certain users with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective
filing date of the invention, to modify the scoring process of Blackmon and further incorporate validated scoring data, as taught by Locke. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the live event reporting application of Locke in order to “control the accuracy, consistency, and cohesiveness of the live event information 180-e being submitted to the live event information reporting system.” (Locke; 0022]).
Regarding Claims 3 & 12,
Modified Blackmon further discloses player and team records referencing the game data object including updated live scoring data (Blackmon; [0082-0084]), however, Blackmon may not explicitly specify that referencing the game data object based on validated scoring data, Locke specifically discloses:
wherein an interface of a third client device is updated to reflect the validated scoring data of the game data object in response to the validation of the live scoring data ([0030] the live event information reporting system 100 may comprise multiple computing devices, [0022] a user interface to provide an efficient process for any user to enter real-time, [0054] if a user reports via a live event reporting user interface 142 a score update (i.e., live event information 180-e) for a live event football game, the live event information component 220-3 may receive the score update and store the live event information 180-e in a database 190-h, [0061] For instance, a user may indicate that a particular team scored a 2-point basket by selecting a button for the team, selecting a button to indicate that number of points scored, and a third button to update the score for the team and with the number of points selected through the event information elements 230-j, [0068] users can update the score to the live event or adjust a reported score (e.g. a penalty) and allow a user to change a reported score, [0058] Certain users with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective
filing date of the invention, to modify the scoring process of Blackmon and further incorporate validation of the scoring data, as taught by Locke. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the live event reporting application of Locke in order to “control the accuracy, consistency, and cohesiveness of the live event information 180-e being submitted to the live event information reporting system.” (Locke; 0022]).
Regarding Claims 4 & 13, 18,
Modified Blackmon discloses, and although Blackmon further discloses player and team records referencing the game data object including updated live scoring data ([0082-0084]), however, Blackmon may not explicitly specify that referencing the game data object based on validated scoring data, Locke specifically discloses:
wherein the interface of the third client device is updated to reflect the validated scoring data in real-time ([0030] the live event information reporting system 100 may comprise multiple computing devices, [0022] a user interface to provide an efficient process for any user to enter real-time, [0054] if a user reports via a live event reporting user interface 142 a score update (i.e., live event information 180-e) for a live event football game, the live event information component 220-3 may receive the score update and store the live event information 180-e in a database 190-h, [0061] For instance, a user may indicate that a particular team scored a 2-point basket by selecting a button for the team, selecting a button to indicate that number of points scored, and a third button to update the score for the team and with the number of points selected through the event information elements 230-j, [0068] users can update the score to the live event or adjust a reported score (e.g. a penalty) and allow a user to change a reported score, [0058] Certain users with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective
filing date of the invention, to modify the scoring process of Blackmon and further incorporate validation of the scoring data, as taught by Locke. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the live event reporting application of Locke in order to “control the accuracy, consistency, and cohesiveness of the live event information 180-e being submitted to the live event information reporting system.” (Locke; 0022]).
Regarding Claims 5 & 14,
Modified Blackmon further discloses wherein the server is further configured to receive an authorization message from the second user identifying the first user and authorizing the first user to act as a subcoach (Blackmon [0006-0007] receive coach profile data from a sports coach associated with one or more athletes, where the coach profile data corresponds to the sports coach, [0017] the evaluator may be a coach or recruiter who is involved with a particular sport and who may be associated with a particular sports team, [0022] recruiting platform may be used to receive event tracking data from a statistician for an athletics competition associated with a sports coach and one or more prospective athletes, [0024] The recruitment platform 110, the prospective athletes 120, the sports coach 130, the statistician 140, and/or the evaluator 150 may be in communication with one another via the one or more networks 102, such communication may be in the form of emails, direct messages, text messages) and determining that the second user is a team user ([0028] FIG. 1, each of the plurality of prospective athletes 120 shown is a member of the same sports team), however, Blackmon may not explicitly specify validating the live scoring data, however Locke specifically discloses:
wherein validating the live scoring data associated with both the first message and the second message further comprises determining that the first user has been authorized to act as the subcoach ([0081] live event information reporting system 100 may allow users for reporting a live event, especially if there are multiple requests to report an event based on metrics or quality characteristics such as accuracy (e.g., based on a review of the reported information), providing user feedback (e.g., live event viewing user interface 144 users may provide feedback for live event reporters and feedback from live event information reporting system 100 administrators), [0084] accept a confirmed reporting request for a user that has successfully reported the live event data, [0057-0058] The user profiles 184-g may be comprised of information utilized to identify a registered user and to manage user interaction with the live event information. Multiple users [subcoach], such as in a crowdsourcing arrangement, may simultaneously report live event information, including, without limitation, scores, commentary, text, differing viewpoints (e.g., different perspectives on a particular play or participation in a debate), and live events from users can be reported to confirm the accuracy and consistency of the live event information being submitted. Certain users [subcoach] with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information, [0068] Some users [subcoach] can update the score to the live event or adjust a reported score (e.g. a penalty) and allow a user to change a reported score);
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective
filing date of the invention, to modify the scoring process of Blackmon and further incorporate validation of the scoring data, as taught by Locke. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the live event reporting application of Locke in order to “control the accuracy, consistency, and cohesiveness of the live event information being submitted to the live event information reporting system.” (Locke; 0022]).
Regarding Claims 6 & 15-16,
Modified Blackmon discloses, and Blackmon further teaches wherein the sporting event involves a first team and a second team ([0028] FIG. 1, each of the plurality of prospective athletes 120 shown is a member of the same sports team, [0044] FIG. 2, data may correspond to a name of a school or league associated with each sports team on the platform), wherein the server is further configured to: receive live scoring data from client devices associated with the first team/second team and a subcoach authorized by the first team/second team ([0082-0084] receiving the event tracking data [live scoring data] from the computing device 141, Blackmon [0006-0007] receive coach profile data from a sports coach associated with one or more athletes, where the coach profile data corresponds to the sports coach, [0017] the evaluator may be a coach or recruiter who is involved with a particular sport and who may be associated with a particular sports team, [0022] recruiting platform may be used to receive event tracking data from a statistician for an athletics competition associated with a sports coach and one or more prospective athletes).
Examiner notes that one of skilled in the art would recognize that repeating/replicating the same process for each team is duplication of parts already disclosed, and thus considered obvious under MPEP 2144.04. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in MPEP 2144.04 directed to various common practices which has been considered routine expedients that support an obviousness rationale, such as making integral, making separable, duplication and resizing, or rearrangement of components for the benefit of optimizing the system to repeat the scoring to update the score for accuracy.
However, Blackmon may not explicitly specify validating the live scoring data, and allow only one user/coach to be authorized by each tea, at a time, and finalize the score as an average of the scoring data validated from users, however Locke specifically discloses:
wherein the server is further configured to: validate live scoring data from client devices associated with the first team/second team and a subcoach authorized by the first team/second team, wherein the server is configured to only allow a single subcoach to be authorized by each team at a time, and wherein the authorization for the subcoach is only valid for that sporting event; and finalize the validated scoring data as finalized scoring data when the sporting event has concluded ([0057-0058] The user profiles 184-g may be comprised of information utilized to identify a registered user, [0074] the live event viewing user interface may be comprised of a game summary element 1112 configured to display a summary of actions occurring during the live event. For example, an action displayed in the game summary element may include which team received the opening kickoff, scoring summaries, turnover summaries, and other information, the live event reporting application 140 may operate to only present one user with a live event reporting user interface 142 for each event. In this manner, the live event reporting application 140 may be utilized to control the accuracy, consistency, and cohesiveness of the live event information 180-e being submitted to the live event information reporting system 100. In one embodiment, the user manager component 220-5 may be configured to track the number of live events reported by a particular user as well as certain quality characteristics, such as completeness, accuracy, and amount of supplied information (e.g., number and amount of detail of scoring summaries). As such, users with more experience, higher quality characteristics, or some combination thereof may be preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface 142, [0086] the user is presented with a live event reporting user interface 142 window, web page, or URL link that may only be accessed by their user profile for a certain duration, such as during the scheduled event time and a certain amount of time before and after the event, [0068] Users can report scoring data during the live event, and the system can allow a user to change the score, and also score adjustment include adding/subtracting [averaging] the score to adjust the final score to update the score).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective
filing date of the invention, to modify the scoring process of Blackmon and further incorporate the features as taught by Locke. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the live event reporting application of Locke in order to “control the accuracy, consistency, and cohesiveness of the live event information being submitted to the live event information reporting system.” (Locke; 0022]).
Regarding Claims 7 & 17,
Modified Blackmon discloses, and Blackmon further teaches wherein the server is further configured to: provide a leaderboard to an interface of a third client device, the leaderboard returned by a query over at least a subset of team records and player records within the storage and comprising at least a portion of the validated scoring data belonging to the game data object, while the sporting event is occurring; and update the leaderboard on the interface of the third client device to reflect the validated scoring data in real-time ((Fig. 7 and [0006] The system can generate athlete profile visualization data for the one or more athletes based on the updated athlete profile data, [0087] upon obtaining the event tracking data and/or the event statistics data as described above, the recruitment platform 110 may generate [update] a real-time or near real-time visual representation (e.g., symbols, markers, etc.) of the athletics competition, where the visual representation may be linked to and accessible from the coach profile for the sports coach 130, an athlete profile for a prospective athlete 120, [0089-0096] The evaluator can request sort input data to the computing device via the application. The graphical interface 600 may display a sorted and/or ranked list that corresponds to a subset of the event statistics data for a subset of prospective athletes, which can be accessed by other users such as coach, athlete, evaluator computing device, and the search visualization data can be used to generate and display a search output interface. The evaluator 150 may then be able to identify potential recruits of the displayed subset of prospective athletes that correspond to the search input data, such as through the use of one or more predetermined thresholds for the search output data. In one implementation, based on this identification and the use of predetermined thresholds, the evaluator 150 may generate one or more watchlists of athletes using the platform 110, such that the platform 110 may track the event statistics data for the listed athletes. The sort output data may include a sorted and/or ranked list of event statistics data and associated prospective athletes that corresponds to the criteria of the sort input data).
Regarding Claim 19,
Modified Blackmon discloses, and Blackmon further teaches wherein updating the game data object occurs contemporaneous with the sporting event ([0083-0084] The recruitment platform 110 may update the athlete profile data for each prospective athlete 120 based on the determined event statistics data, [0087-0088] Upon obtaining the event tracking data and/or the event statistics data, the recruitment platform 110 may generate [update] a real-time visual representation of the competition, see also [0023-0024]).
Regarding Claims 8 & 20,
Modified Blackmon discloses, and Blackmon further teaches wherein the first message comprises a location data associated with the first client device ([0044] As shown in FIG. 2, data may include location information, [0041] location information of the sports coach for the team using the application from the computing device, [0046] and includes location, and/or other details associated with each of the prospective athletes 120), wherein the server is further configured to confirm the first user is present at the sporting event using the location data associated with the first client device ([0041] application via one or more input devices of the computing device 131, in some implementations, the location for the sports coach 130 may be determined using the computing device 131 in conjunction with one or more satellite navigation systems, e.g., GPS, to determine the location, [0052] the location of the athlete 120 can be determined using the computing device in conjunction with satellite/GPS).
Response to Arguments and Amendment
Applicant’s arguments and amendment is considered however is found unpersuasive and fails to overcome any of the claim rejections.
Regarding 35 USC 101, Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image1.png
380
796
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Sports reporting using the assistance of a generic computer is nothing more than applying the abstract idea using a computer as a tool. Sports reporting is not a technological problem rooted in technology being improved upon in any particular technological manner. Examiner notes that “sports reporting” is not an actual technology in any technological field. There is nothing in the claimed invention than improves any computer technology or internet technology other an merely “apply it.”
Since the rejection indicates that the disclosed invention does not improve any computer technology, the burden now shifts to Applicant to provide persuasive arguments supported by necessary evidence to clearly demonstrate that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the disclosed invention actually improves technology, and not just invokes computers merely as a tool to implement the abstract idea. Applicant has failed to provide any underlying factual basis of how the disclosed invention actually improves technology or provides any technical improvements to the technological capabilities of the computer itself. Any such evidence must establish factually what the specification would convey to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide as a technological improvement. See MPEP § 716.09. However, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a fundamental economic concept, mental process, mathematical concept or method of organizing human activity) is not necessarily an actual improvement in computer technology. For example, in Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the Court determined that the claimed user interface used in trading simply provided a trader with more accessible information to facilitate market trades more efficiently, which may have improved the business process of market trading but did not at all improve any technical capability of computer technology.
A claimed process covering embodiments that can merely be performed on a computer, as well as embodiments that are abstract cannot directly improve computer technology. See RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., 855 F.3d 1322, 1328, 122 USPQ2d 1377, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (process for encoding/decoding facial data using image codes assigned to particular facial features held ineligible). Since the entire scope of the disclosed claim merely describes an improvement to an abstract idea itself, it cannot be said to improve computer technology or improve any technical capabilities of the computer itself. Merely adding generic computer components to perform the claimed invention is not sufficient. Thus, the claim must include significantly more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology.
Regarding 35 USC 103 prior art rejection, Applicant asserts:
PNG
media_image2.png
391
805
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s assertion is unpersuasive. Locke does discloses at least one of a player record and a team record referencing the game data object only refers to validated scoring data in [0022] disclosing a user interface to provide an efficient process for any user to enter real-time, [0054] if a user reports via a live event reporting user interface 142 a score update (i.e., live event information 180-e) for a live event football game, the live event information component 220-3 may receive the score update and store the live event information 180-e in a database 190-h, [0061] For instance, a user may indicate that a particular team scored a 2-point basket by selecting a button for the team, selecting a button to indicate that number of points scored, and a third button to update the score for the team and with the number of points selected through the event information elements 230-j, [0068] users can update the score to the live event or adjust a reported score (e.g. a penalty) and allow a user to change a reported score, [0058] Certain users with more experience and higher quality characteristics are preferentially granted access to the live event reporting interface to confirm the accuracy of the live event information. The “purpose” for getting reports from multiple users is not claimed at all for purposes of patentably distinguishing over the prior art. Additionally, the broadest reasonable interpretation of same does not mean the values are required to be equal. Same can have same association, same category, same agreement with each other. There is no specific way or algorithm required in the claims regarding how the validation of scoring data occurs in any particular way. Thus, the claimed invention fails to overcome the prior art.
Relevant Art
The relevant prior art made of record not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the current and/or previous PTO-892 Notice of References Cited.
US 20110066664 Sports collaboration and communication platform (Abstract) A sports management platform and social network for those associated with youth and other sports to simplify common tasks, unify related participants, and enhance the activities surrounding playing sports. The system brings together players, parents, and coaches into an integrated experience centered on the information each is interested in).
US 20210334546 Scalable sport data collecting, sharing and processing system (Abstract & 0021) The referee generates the score confirming event 512 though the user interface of client device 510 at network time t502. The client device 510 may reason from the events 506 and 512 that the confirmed score are made by the player 314 and generate another event.
US 20210128981 System And Method For Evaluating Amateur Athletes For Collegiate Level Placement
US 20140316832 Recruiting Management System
US 20190087781 Digital credential system for skills analysis
US 20150106290 Methods and systems for enhancing student visibility during recruiting
US 20210275059 Products For Assessing Athletic Ability And Generating Performance Data
US 20140040239 Live event information management system
S. CHAUDHARY and A. Singh, "Artificial Intelligence In Sports," 2019 International Conference on contemporary Computing and Informatics (IC3I), Singapore, 2019, pp. 84-93, doi: 10.1109/IC3I46837.2019.9055689.
Co