Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 2-21 are pending.
This action is response to the application filed on December 18, 2024.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
This application is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/321,175, filed May 22, 2023, now allowed; which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 17/341,944, filed June 8, 2021, now U.S. Patent No. 11,694,159, issued July 4, 2023; which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 16/264,206, filed January 31, 2019, now U.S. Patent No. 11,055,665, issued July 6, 2021; which is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 15/267,324, filed September 16, 2016, now U.S. Patent No. 10,229,458, issued March 12, 2019; which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional No. 62/394,712, filed September 14, 2016, the entire contents of each being incorporated herein by reference.
Claim Interpretation; Broadest Reasonable Interpretation
CLAIMS MUST BE GIVEN THEIR BROADEST REASONABLE INTERPRETATION IN LIGHT OF THE SPECIFICATION
During patent examination, the pending claims must be "given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." The Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1316, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005) expressly recognized that the USPTO employs the "broadest reasonable interpretation" standard: The Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") determines the scope of claims in patent applications not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon giving claims their broadest reasonable construction "in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art.".
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
2173.05(e) Lack of Antecedent Basis. A claim is indefinite when it contains words or phrases whose meaning is unclear.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention. Because claims 2,15 and 21 recites, “…. for each respective pair of a plurality of paired entity records that are determined from the plurality of entity records…. ". The term “plurality of paired entity records” is introduced without first defining what constitutes a “paired entity record”. Earlier, only “a plurality of entity records” is introduced. Thus, it is unclear whether: A “paired entity record” is a data structure, or merely a logical pairing of two entity records. The phrase should be grounded in previously introduced elements.
And “(a)…. wherein the at least some of the transaction records include transaction records associated with data transaction requests processed by different ones of the plurality of transaction processing computer systems, and (b) …. calculating a difference based on the at least one common value and the first value of the respective transaction record, wherein the correlation value for the first pair is based on the calculated difference ….” , which render indefinite claimed invention scope. A claim is indefinite when it contains words or phrases whose meaning is unclear.
Examiner Note: May be renders the claim indefinite by failing to point out that is being performed. Applicants are advised to amend the claim so solve the 112 rejection set forth in the claim.
Examiner Note:
The closest prior art made of Thiagarajan et al (US 10366791 B1) teaches data surveillance computer system for detecting manipulation in how transactions are processed across multiple disparate data transaction systems, the data surveillance computer system comprising, at least one hardware processor that is configured to execute computer executable instructions to perform operations comprising: processing transaction records that each correspond to a different data transaction that was processed by a corresponding transaction processing computer system of a plurality of transaction processing computer systems. Thiagarajan et al (US 10366791 B1) teaches but fails to teach the claimed features in combination with overall claimed limitations when interpreted in light of the specification. An applicant may overcome a 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph rejection by persuasively arguing and/or amending that the claims are patentably distinguishable from 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph rejection, or by amending the claims to patentably distinguish.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISAAC M WOO whose telephone number is (571)272-4043. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 to 5:00.
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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached on 571-272-4078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ISAAC M WOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163