DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. This office action is in response to applicant's communication of December 19, 2025. The rejections are stated below. Claims 1-17 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendment/Arguments
Applicant’s arguments concerning 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered but are not persuasive. The claims recite a sequence of operations for managing life insurance policy data and facilitating settlement contract transactions. These operations fall within the abstract idea categories of fundamental economic practices and certain methods of organizing human activity. Receiving electronic data representative of a life insurance policy. Detecting whether the electronic data includes a life expectancy rating. Based on detecting that the life expectancy rating is absent, generating a normalized database record by extracting field data from the electronic data that matches fields of a standard database profile schema to populate the fields for the normalized database record, and populating a life expectancy field within the normalized database record with a standard nonavailability indicator. Displaying a graphical user interface including display of information about a policy holder seeking a viatical settlement, information about an insurance company, and data indicative of a number of bids. The GUI is arranged in a first configuration for viewing by a policyholder, in which the GUI omits display of a life expectancy of the policy holder, and a second configuration for displaying the life expectancy omitted in the first configuration. Receiving through the GUI a query for a settlement contract that is available for sale, based on an input entered into at least one field of the GUI. The settlement contract comprises a sale of a policyholder's death benefit in a life insurance policy in exchange for money and in absence of any rating representative of a valuation derived from the life expectancy rating and a creditworthiness rating of the insurance company. After detecting selection of an icon requesting entry of the query, searching a database of settlement contracts and policies, and retrieving a number of first settlement contracts and policies in response to user specified selection criteria at least a first settlement contract that comprises information matching the query. The database is indexed for searching based at least in part on uniqueness ratings of each given policy profile and contracts and policies. A uniqueness rating is generated for the normalized database record based on detecting whether one or more fields of the normalized database record includes a data value predefined as deviating from standard values within the database, including at least a policy value that is greater than a preset policy value threshold. Receiving during a predetermined period of time a plurality of bids for the first settlement contract from a plurality of bidders through multiple instances of the GUI as respectively displayed on a plurality of remote devices. Each of the plurality of bids comprises a bid price thereby allowing to show a best bid price amongst the plurality of bids. The multiple instances of the GUI are arranged in the second configuration which includes display of the life expectancy omitted in the first configuration. Determining that a first bidder of the plurality of bidders has submitted the best bid price for the first settlement contract. Generating a first notification in one of the multiple instances of the GUI for the first bidder, and a second notification in the GUI for the policyholder, wherein the first and second notifications indicate a detected match to sell the first settlement contract at the best bid price. Executing a transfer of the settlement contract from the first bidder to at least two subsequent bidders, prior to a transfer of a beneficial interest in the life insurance policy.
Claim 9 recites a method including similar steps. Dependent claims 2 through 8 and 10 through 17 add limitations such as communicating availability to potential purchasers, providing an opportunity to reject the match, calculating life expectancy using a predefined calculative function, determining a price based on a rating, receiving health metrics from a medical evaluation, and computing an initial bid price based on the rating. The recited operations describe a process for conducting a financial transaction. The concept of receiving incomplete data and inserting a placeholder to complete a record is a data management practice. The concept of providing different views of information to different parties is a presentation choice. The concept of indexing records based on a threshold comparison is a classification operation. The concept of receiving bids, identifying a highest bid, notifying parties of a match, and transferring a contract is a fundamental economic practice. Each of these operations can be performed by a person using paper records, a pen, and a telephone.
The claims do not recite any change to a computer or database architecture. The steps of extracting field data matching a schema, populating fields, and inserting a placeholder do not alter how a database stores or retrieves data. The claimed uniqueness rating based on comparing a policy value to a preset threshold does not modify the underlying structure of a database index. The claimed graphical user interface with two configurations does not describe a new interface technology or a new method of generating display elements. The claims simply describe abstract ideas and instruct a processor to execute them. The Federal Circuit has held that claims directed to collecting information, analyzing information, and displaying results are directed to abstract ideas. Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Applicant argues that the claims are directed to an improvement in database capability because they facilitate creation and usage of database entries when underlying information is unavailable. The claim language does not describe a change to database functionality. The database continues to store data in fields and retrieve data based on queries. The presence of a placeholder instead of a calculated value does not enable any new database operation. The claims describe what data is stored, not how the database stores it.
Applicant argues that the claims are integrated into a practical application because the steps allow transactions to occur even when foundational data is incomplete. The claims apply the abstract idea to the field of life insurance settlements. Applying an abstract idea to a particular field of endeavor does not integrate the idea into a practical application. Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208, 223 (2014). The claims do not recite an improvement to a specific machine or a transformation of an article into a different state or thing. The recited components include a processor, a non transitory computer readable medium, a display, a graphical user interface, a database, and remote devices. The claims do not specify any specialized hardware. The claims do not describe a new type of processor, memory, display, or network. The steps themselves do not transform the computing system into a special purpose machine. The steps of receiving data, extracting field data, populating fields, displaying a GUI, receiving a query, searching a database, receiving bids, determining a best bid, generating notifications, and executing a transfer are operations that any computer performs when executing instructions. The claims do not limit the computer to a specific configuration or operation. The concept of using a placeholder for missing data does not tie the claim to a practical application because the placeholder is a symbol. The claims do not explain how the placeholder enables any subsequent operation that would not be possible without it. The claims do not describe any technical effect produced by the placeholder. The claims state that the placeholder is stored.
The concept of a uniqueness rating based on a threshold comparison also does not tie the claim to a practical application. The claims do not describe how this rating improves search accuracy or reduces processing time. The claims do not describe any technical problem solved by using a uniqueness rating. The claims state that the database is indexed based on this rating. Because the claims do not recite an improvement to a specific technology and do not impose a limit on the abstract idea beyond requiring a computer, the claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Even if the claims were considered to be directed to an abstract idea, the claims do not recite an inventive concept that transforms the abstract idea into patent eligible subject matter. An inventive concept requires more than simply instructing a computer to perform the abstract idea. The claim elements, considered individually and as an ordered combination, must add something significant beyond the abstract idea itself.
The claims recite the following additional elements beyond the abstract idea: a processor, a non transitory computer readable medium, a display, a graphical user interface, a database, remote devices, and instructions stored on the medium. The claims do not describe any specialized programming or any non standard arrangement of these components. The steps of generating a normalized database record with a placeholder and generating a uniqueness rating based on a threshold are not inventive concepts. Inserting a placeholder into a field is a data entry operation. Comparing a value to a threshold and assigning a rating based on that comparison is an arithmetic operation. Indexing a database based on that rating is a database operation. The ordered combination of these steps does not produce an inventive concept. The combination of receiving incomplete data, inserting a placeholder, providing different GUI views, receiving bids, matching a bid, and transferring a contract is a sequence that describes a business method. The order of these steps is the order that any person would naturally follow when conducting a settlement transaction. The claims do not impose any unconventional ordering of steps. The claims do not require any steps that are not already present in the abstract idea itself.
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 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 9 is directed to the abstract idea of “managing life instruments” which is grouped under “organizing human activity… fundamental economic practice” [hedging, mitigating risk) in prong one of step 2A (See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance).
Claim 9 recites “a method in an … comprising:
receiving, …, … data that is representative of a life insurance
policy;
detecting, using the …, whether the … data includes a life expectancy rating for the life insurance policy;
based on detecting that the life expectancy rating is absent from the electronic data,
generate a normalized … record for the … data, including:
extracting field data from the electronic data that matches fields of a standard
… profile schema to populate the fields for the normalized … record;
populating a life expectancy field within the normalized … record with a
standard nonavailability indicator to compensate for the absent life expectancy rating;
providing, on a display, a … that includes display of information about a policy holder seeking a viatical settlement, information about an insurance company, and data indicative of a best bid price, wherein the … is alternatively arrangeable into either of a … for viewing by a policyholder, and into a … for viewing by a plurality of bidders, wherein in the … the … omits display of a life expectancy of the policy holder, and in the … the ... includes display of the life expectancy of the policyholder omitted in the first configuration,
receiving, through the …, a query for a settlement contract that is available for sale, in which the query is based on an input entered into at least one field of the …, and the settlement contract comprises a sale of a policyholder's death benefit in a life insurance policy in exchange for money and in absence of any rating;
after detecting selection of an icon requesting entry of the query, searching a …of settlement contracts and/or polices, and retrieving, using a …, a number of first settlement contracts and/or policies in response to user-specified selection criteria that comprises information matching the query;
wherein the … is indexed for searching based at least in part on uniqueness ratings of each given policy profile and/or contracts and/or policies, and
wherein a uniqueness rating is generated for the normalized … record based on detecting whether one or more fields of the normalized … record includes a data value predefined as deviating from standard values within the …, including at least a policy value that is greater than a preset policy value threshold;
receiving at the processor, during a pre-determined period of time, a plurality of bids for the first settlement contract from the plurality of bidders through multiple instances of the …as displayed respectively on …, in which each of the plurality of bids comprises a bid price thereby allowing to show a best bid amongst the plurality of bids, and wherein the multiple instances of the … are arranged in the …;
determining, using the …, that a first bidder of the plurality of bidders has submitted a best bid price for the first settlement contract;
generating, using the …, a first notification in one of the multiple instances of the …for the first bidder, and a second notification in the … of the policyholder, wherein the first and second notifications indicate a detected match to sell the first settlement contract at the best bid price; and executing a transfer of the settlement contract from the first bidder to at least two subsequent bidders, prior to transfer of a beneficial interest in the life insurance policy”.
These limitations describe an abstract idea of managing life instruments and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity( fundamental economic practices such as hedging, mitigating risk). Accordingly, claim 9 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A: Prong 1: YES).
The claim also recites as additional elements such as “electronic device, at least one processor, electronic, database, graphical user interface, first configuration of GUI, second configuration of GUI, processor, remote devices” which do no more than implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment. Therefore, claim 9 recites an abstract idea without a practical application (Step 2A - Prong 2: NO).
Further, as the additional elements of claim 9 do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field. Thus, claim 9 is not patent eligible (Step 2B: NO).
Claim 1 also recite the abstract idea of idea of managing life instruments and corresponds to Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (fundamental economic practices such as hedging and mitigating risk) step one of step 2A (MPEP 2106.04). Claim 1 includes the additional elements of “electronic device, graphical user interface, first configuration of GUI, second configuration of GUI, database, processor, remote devices”. The additional elements do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as they do no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, they do not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 2 recites “communicate, through other alternate instances of the …, to a plurality of potential purchasers that the first settlement contract is available for purchase” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “GUI” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 3 recites “provide the policyholder of the first settlement contract with an opportunity to reject the match through the …” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “GUI” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 4 recites “receive, through the …, a request to reject the match” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “GUI” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 5 recites “receive, through the …, a request to reject the match” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “GUI” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 6 recites “calculating the life expectancy of the policyholder by retrieving a predefined set of values prestored in the … and entering the predefined set of values into predefined calculative function” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “database” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 7 recites “determine a price of the first settlement contract based at least in part on the rating” which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim 8 recites “receive and store health metrics in the …, as generated from a medical evaluation of the policyholder” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “database” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 10 recites “communicating, through other alternate instances of the …, to a plurality of potential purchasers that the first settlement contract is available for purchase” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “GUI” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 11 recites “providing, through the…, the policyholder of the first settlement contract with an opportunity to reject the match” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “GUI” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 12 recites “receiving, through the …, a request to reject the match” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “GUI” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 13 recites “receiving, through the GUI, a request to reject the match” which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim 14 recites “calculating the life expectancy of the policyholder by retrieving a predefined set of values prestored in the …, and entering the predefined set of values into predefined calculative function” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “database” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Claim 15 recites “determine a price of the first settlement contract based at least in part on the rating” which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim 16 recites “received result information generated from performance of a medical evaluation of the policyholder” which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim 17 recites “computing, using the … based on the rating, an initial bid price for the settlement contract” which further defines the abstract idea. The claim recites “processor” as an additional element. The additional element does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or link the abstract idea a particular technological environment. Therefore, as it does no more than serve as a tool to implement the abstract idea and/or provide a particular technological environment, it does not improve computer functionality or improve another technology or technical field.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN T POE whose telephone number is (571)272-9789. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30am through 6pm EST.
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, Calvin Hewitt can be reached on 571-272-6709. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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.
/K.T.P/Examiner, Art Unit 3692 /KEVIN T POE/
/Shahid Merchant/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3684
Prosecution Insights