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 AIA .
Status of Claims
This communication is a Final Office action in response to communications received on 05/15/2026. Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 16 and 18 have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-21 are currently pending and have been addressed below.
Examiner note: Claims 3, 4, 6, 9-11 and 15 are directed to claim 0; Examiner interprets as a typographical error.
Response to Amendment
Applicant has amended claims 2, 6 and 8 to overcome the claim objections. Therefore, Examiner withdraws the claim objections in the previous office action. However, Examiner notes there are new claim objections, as claims 3, 4, 6, 9-11 and 15 are directed to claim 0.
Examiner acknowledges receipt of drawing, filed on 05/15/2026. Examiner withdraws the drawing objection for Figure 4.
Applicant has amended claims 1, 16 and 18 to overcome the 112(b) rejections. Therefore 112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 04/20/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 4, 6, 9-11 and 15 are objected to because of the following informality: Claims 3, 4, 6, 9-11 and 15 are directed to claim 0. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without a practical application and significantly more.
Step 1: Identifying Statutory Categories
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, it must be determined whether the claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter (i.e., Step 1). In the instant case, claims 1-21 are directed to a system (i.e. a machine). Thus, each of these claims fall within one of the four statutory categories. Nevertheless, the claims fall within the judicial exception of an abstract idea.
Step 2A: Prong One: Abstract Ideas
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites an abstract idea. Independent claim 1 recites: A system for managing benefits payments, comprising: receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost; receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount; cost calculation determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost; mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; and sending the identified discrepancies.
Independent claim 16 recites: A system for managing benefits payments, comprising: receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost; receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount; receiving a user input corresponding to at least one benefit plan recipient and comparing the user input with said benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost to update said benefits plan information benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost based at least in part on the user input; determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost; mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; sending the identified discrepancies; grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least the actual deduction amount, benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; sending the carrier bill to a user; communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill.
Independent claim 18 recites: A system for managing benefits payments, comprising receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost; receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount; determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost; mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; identify and present options to cure the discrepancies and merging said discrepancies and options into a report for display; receiving user input in response to the presented options to cure discrepancies and determining a new actual deduction amount for at least one payroll; grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the new actual deduction amount, the benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; and sending the carrier bill. The limitations as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls under the abstract groupings of: Certain methods of organizing human activity (commercial or legal interactions (including advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations; (managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). As the claims discuss a system for managing benefits payments, which is a clear business relations and one of certain methods of organizing human activity.
Mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations and mathematical calculations (as independent claim 1 recites for example: “cost calculation determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost”.))
Mental Processes (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion (claim 1 recites for example, “receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients”; “receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount”; “determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost”; “mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan”; “identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; and sending the identified discrepancies.”) Concepts performed in the human mind as mental processes because the steps of receiving, determining, mapping, identifying, comparing and analyzing data mimic human thought processes of observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion, perhaps with paper and pencil, where data interpretation is perceptible in the human mind. See In re TLI Commc’ns LLCPatentLitig., 823 F.3d 607, 611 (Fed. Cir. 2016); FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., Inc., 839 F.3d 1089, 1093-94 (Fed. Cir. 2016)).
Further, dependent claims add additional limitations, for example: (claim 2) grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least the actual deduction amount, benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; and sending the carrier bill to a user; (claim 3) communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill; (claim 4) receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; (claim 5) identify and present options to cure the discrepancies and merging said discrepancies and options into a report for display on a user device; (claim 6) wherein the options include correcting an enrollment of the benefit recipient if the benefit recipient is identified on only one of the benefit benefits plan information and payroll; (claim 7) receiving user input in response to the presented options to cure discrepancies and determining a new actual deduction amount for at least one payroll; (claim 8) wherein the new actual deduction amount is determined by either curing the discrepancy in the next payroll, spreading the cure across remaining payrolls in the benefits cycle, or deducting fixed or percentage amount that total to the discrepancy amount until cured; (claim 9) grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the new actual deduction amount, the benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; and an output port for sending the carrier bill to a third-party device; (claim 10) communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill; (claim 11) grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least the actual deduction amount, benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; sending the carrier bill to a third-party device; and a payment processing module executing on the processor that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill; (claim 12) receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; and identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; (claim 13) wherein the benefits plan information includes a benefits type and the at least one deduction slot includes a deduction type, said mapping using the benefits type and the deduction type to match the deduction slot to a benefits plan; (claim 14) grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; sending the carrier bill to a third-party device; a payment processing that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill, wherein the payment is taken from at least from funds associated with the actual deduction amounts; (claim 15) tracking discrepancies across all benefit recipients and updates an employee deduction reserve fund; wherein the payment may also be taken from funds associated with the employee deduction reserve fund; (claim 17) receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; (claim 19) payment processing that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill; (claim 20) receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; and identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; (claim 21) receiving a user input corresponding to at least one benefit plan recipient and comparing the user input with said benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost to update said benefits plan information benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost based at least in part on the user input, but these only serve to further limit the abstract idea. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation of certain methods of organizing human activity, mathematical concepts and mental processes, but for the recitation of generic computer components, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A: Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims merely describe how to generally “apply” the abstract idea. In particular, the claims only recite the additional elements – (claim 1) input port, computer, processor, cost calculation module, mapping module; discrepancy module; output port; user device; (claim 2) consolidated bill generation module; (claim 3) payment processing module; (claim 5) reconciliation module; (claim 15) employee deduction reserve module; (claim 16) verification module; (claim 18) third-party device. These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Simply implementing the abstract idea on generic computer components is not a practical application of the abstract idea, as it adds the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). The limitations generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (such as computing, see MPEP 2106.05(h)). The “receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost”; “receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount”; “merging said discrepancies and options into a report for display”; “receiving user input in response to the presented options to cure discrepancies”; “grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information”, limitations describe data gathering. The Office has long considered data gathering to be insignificant extra-solution activity. Merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to an abstract idea does not integrate the exception into a practical application, see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation and do not impose a meaningful limit to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to discussion of integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply an exception and generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. With respect to the computer components, these limitations are described in Applicant’s own specification as generic and conventional elements. See at least Applicants specification, para 00044 recites: “The computer 10 has one or more input ports 102 for receiving information and data from one or more external sources, such as a user, client, or provider, via any suitable mechanism. In some cases, the input ports 102 may receive information via computer network such as the Internet, such as via HTTPS, FTP, APIs, database calls, or other known methods”, para 00045, recites: “The computer 10 may send data feeds to recipients external to the computer 10 in any suitable format, either via computer network such as the Internet, such as via HTTPS, FTP, APIs, database calls, or other known methods.”, para 00052, recites: “The computer 10 may communicate with the external banking systems to effectuate a payment using known methods.”; para 00053, recites: “The database 70 may be storage local to the computer 10, networked storage, cloud storage, or any other known storage method.”
The specification spells out different generic equipment that might be applied using the concept and the particular steps such conventional processing would entail based on the concept of information access. Thus, the claims at issue amount to nothing significantly more than instructions to apply the abstract idea using some unspecified, generic computers. The use of such generic computers to receive or transmit data over a network has been identified as well understood, routine and conventional activity by the courts.
With respect to “receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost”; “receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount”; “merging said discrepancies and options into a report for display”; “receiving user input in response to the presented options to cure discrepancies”; “grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information” limitations, which amounts to mere data gathering or merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(d). The legal precedent in Symantec, TLI and OIP Techs court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicated that receipt and transmission of information over a computer network are a well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when claimed in a generic manner, as is the case here. See also Trading Techs. Int’l, Inc. v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (data gathering and displaying are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities). Furthermore, claims 1-21 have been fully analyzed to determine whether there are additional elements recited that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The limitations fail to include an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Thus, nothing in the claim adds significantly more to the abstract idea. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation. The claims are ineligible. Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claim that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the exception itself, the claims are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 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 establishing a background 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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petruzzi (US 7,917,415 B1), hereinafter “Petruzzi”, over Bull (US 2020/0387976 A1), hereinafter “Bull”.
Regarding Claim 1, Petruzzi teaches A system for managing benefits payments, comprising: (See at least Petruzzi, Abstract; Petruzzi, column 1, lines 34-39: "An embodiment of the present invention is a retirement administration and distribution system. A client administering module administers clients using a set of client business rules. The clients include at least an operator and a plurality of customers. An account manager administers accounts and process retirement benefits of the customers.");
an input port receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost; (See at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13: "The account manager administers accounts and process retirement benefits of the customers. It may include an accrual account manager 222, a benefit accounts manager 224, and a retirement benefits processing module. The accrual accounts manager 222 administers accrual accounts of the customers 70's in the customer group 70 using a set of accrual business rules.... The retirement benefits processing module calculates and converts benefits of the customers 70's using a set of business rules."; Further, Petruzzi, Column 7, lines 33-40: "The business rule processing module is interfaced to at least one of the client administering module 210, the communication interface 230, the account manager 220, the employment and payroll interface 240, the self-service Website, and the UI module to process a set of business rules related to accounts and retirement benefits of the plurality of customers. The business rule processing module 260 may be located in each of these modules.", Examiner notes the UI module is the input port); said input port receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount; (Petruzzi, column 7, lines 19-27: "The employment and payroll interface 240 imports employment and payroll information of the customers from an employment and payroll database 245. The employment and payroll interface 240 may performs functions related to employment and payroll by interacting via the employment and business rules associated with the business rule processing module 260. It may also provide data to be processed, used, incorporated, or acted upon by the business rule processing module 260 and/or the UI module 270.")
a computer including a processor for executing a cost calculation module, ...; said cost calculation module determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost; (Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 as above, where the benefits account manager is the cost calculation module, and it computes deduction amounts; see Petruzzi, column 12, lines 59-65; See at least Petruzzi, Figure 1B, teaching the computing environment);
an output port ... (See at least Petruzzi, Figure 2, element 270, teaches a UI (user interface) module).
Yet, Petruzzi does not appear to explicitly teach and in the same field of endeavor Bull teaches a mapping module, and a discrepancy module ... said mapping module mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; said discrepancy module identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; and ... for sending the identified discrepancies to a user device (See at least Bull, para 0100, teaches the reconciliation module is configured to map at any point in time metrics; Bull, para 0046, teaches mapping data, para 0067, teaches receiving and loading data, including data from external databases, mapping data to create group IDs, mapping data, including invoice data, for consolidation and reconciliation, mapping data to identify underlying details of data sought to be consolidated or reconciled, mapping data to identify underlying benefit plan details; See at least Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system; Bull, para 0145, teaches a report of discrepancies, errors, inequalities, and/or exceptions, if any exist, is generated and sent). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Petruzzi with a mapping module, and a discrepancy module ... said mapping module mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; said discrepancy module identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; and ... for sending the identified discrepancies to a user device as taught by Bull with the motivation for the administration and processing of records and payment of monies owed (Bull, para 0001). The Petruzzi invention now incorporating the Bull invention, has all the limitations of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising: a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the actual deduction amount, benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; and said output port sending the carrier bill to a user device (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing module; Bull, teaches consolidating throughout, see at least Bull, para 0169, teaching provide TPAs (third-party administrators) the ability to generate a bill that is consolidated from all other vendors that a specific client is using providing the client a single consolidated bill that may be broken down).
Regarding Claim 3, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 2, further comprising a payment processing module executing on the processor that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill (See at least Petruzzi, Column 46, lines 27-end of column, teaches The automated clearing house (ACH) payments UI which communicates for payment of bill; Further, Bull, para 0157, teaches the payment processing module may communicate with the external banking system).
Regarding Claim 4, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 2, further comprising: the input port receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; the discrepancy module identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 5, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 1, further comprising a reconciliation module configured to identify and present options to cure the discrepancies and said reconciliation module merging said discrepancies and options into a report for display on a user device (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system; Both Petruzzi and Bull teach reports throughout).
Regarding Claim 6, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 5, wherein the options include correcting an enrollment of the benefit recipient if the benefit recipient is identified on only one of the benefits plan information and payroll (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 7, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 5, said reconciliation module receiving user input in response to the presented options to cure discrepancies and determining a new actual deduction amount for at least one payroll (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 8, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 7, wherein the new actual deduction amount is determined by either curing the discrepancy in the next payroll, spreading the cure across remaining payrolls in the benefits cycle, or deducting a fixed amount or a percentage amount that total to the discrepancy amount until cured (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 9, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 7, further comprising: a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the new actual deduction amount, the benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; and an output port for sending the carrier bill to a third-party device (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing module; Bull, teaches consolidating throughout, see at least Bull, para 0169, teaching provide TPAs (third-party administrators) the ability to generate a bill that is consolidated from all other vendors that a specific client is using providing the client a single consolidated bill that may be broken down).
Regarding Claim 10, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 6, further comprising a payment processing module executing on the processor that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill (See at least Petruzzi, Column 46, lines 27-end of column, teaches The automated clearing house (ACH) payments UI which communicates for payment of bill; Further, Bull, para 0157, teaches the payment processing module may communicate with the external banking system).
Regarding Claim 11, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 7, further comprising a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least the actual deduction amount, benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; an output port for sending the carrier bill to a third-party device; and a payment processing module executing on the processor that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing module; Bull, teaches consolidating throughout, see at least Bull, para 0169, teaching provide TPAs (third-party administrators) the ability to generate a bill that is consolidated from all other vendors that a specific client is using providing the client a single consolidated bill that may be broken down).
Regarding Claim 12, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 5, further comprising: the input port receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; and the discrepancy module identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 13, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 1, wherein the benefits plan information includes a benefits type and the at least one deduction slot includes a deduction type, said mapping module using the benefits type and the deduction type to match the deduction slot to a benefits plan (Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system; See at least Bull, para 0100, teaches the reconciliation module is configured to map at any point in time metrics; Bull, para 0046, teaches mapping data, para 0067, teaches receiving and loading data, including data from external databases, mapping data to create group IDs, mapping data, including invoice data, for consolidation and reconciliation, mapping data to identify underlying details of data sought to be consolidated or reconciled).
Regarding Claim 14, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 1, further comprising a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; an output port for sending the carrier bill to a third-party device; a payment processing module executing on the processor that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill, wherein the payment is taken from at least from funds associated with the actual deduction amounts (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing module; Bull, teaches consolidating throughout, see at least Bull, para 0169, teaching provide TPAs (third-party administrators) the ability to generate a bill that is consolidated from all other vendors that a specific client is using providing the client a single consolidated bill that may be broken down).
Regarding Claim 15, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 14, further comprising an employee deduction reserve module tracking discrepancies across all benefit recipients and updates an employee deduction reserve fund; wherein the payment may also be taken from funds associated with the employee deduction reserve fund (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0173, teaches reserve funds; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 16, Petruzzi teaches A system for managing benefits payments, comprising: (See at least Petruzzi, Abstract; Petruzzi, column 1, lines 34-39: "An embodiment of the present invention is a retirement administration and distribution system. A client administering module administers clients using a set of client business rules. The clients include at least an operator and a plurality of customers. An account manager administers accounts and process retirement benefits of the customers.");
an input port receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost; (See at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13: "The account manager administers accounts and process retirement benefits of the customers. It may include an accrual account manager 222, a benefit accounts manager 224, and a retirement benefits processing module. The accrual accounts manager 222 administers accrual accounts of the customers 70's in the customer group 70 using a set of accrual business rules.... The retirement benefits processing module calculates and converts benefits of the customers 70's using a set of business rules."; Further, Petruzzi, Column 7, lines 33-40: "The business rule processing module is interfaced to at least one of the client administering module 210, the communication interface 230, the account manager 220, the employment and payroll interface 240, the self-service Website, and the UI module to process a set of business rules related to accounts and retirement benefits of the plurality of customers. The business rule processing module 260 may be located in each of these modules.", Examiner notes the UI module is the input port);
said input port receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount; (Petruzzi, column 7, lines 19-27: "The employment and payroll interface 240 imports employment and payroll information of the customers from an employment and payroll database 245. The employment and payroll interface 240 may performs functions related to employment and payroll by interacting via the employment and business rules associated with the business rule processing module 260. It may also provide data to be processed, used, incorporated, or acted upon by the business rule processing module 260 and/or the UI module 270.");
a computer including a processor for executing ... , a cost calculation module, ... ; (Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 as above, where the benefits account manager is the cost calculation module, and it computes deduction amounts; see Petruzzi, column 12, lines 59-65; See at least Petruzzi, Figure 1B, teaching the computing environment);
... said cost calculation module determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost; (Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 as above, where the benefits account manager is the cost calculation module, and it computes deduction amounts; see Petruzzi, column 12, lines 59-65; See at least Petruzzi, Figure 1B, teaching the computing environment); ...
an output port ... (See at least Petruzzi, Figure 2, element 270, teaches a UI (user interface) module).
...
said output port ... (See at least Petruzzi, Figure 2, element 270, teaches a UI (user interface) module) ... and
a payment processing module executing on the processor that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill (See at least Petruzzi, Column 46, lines 27-end of column, teaches The automated clearing house (ACH) payments UI which communicates for payment of bill).
Yet, Petruzzi does not appear to explicitly teach and in the same field of endeavor Bull teaches a verification module... said verification module receiving a user input corresponding to at least one benefit plan recipient and comparing the user input with said benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost to update said benefits plan information benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost based at least in part on the user input (See at least Bull, para 0101, The reconciliation module 140 is configured to reconcile against numerous data feeds, like payroll, to ensure accurate deductions and confirm metrics) a mapping module, and a discrepancy module ... said mapping module mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; (See at least Bull, para 0100, teaches the reconciliation module is configured to map at any point in time metrics; Bull, para 0046, teaches mapping data, para 0067, teaches receiving and loading data, including data from external databases, mapping data to create group IDs, mapping data, including invoice data, for consolidation and reconciliation, mapping data to identify underlying details of data sought to be consolidated or reconciled, mapping data to identify underlying benefit plan details) said discrepancy module identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; ... sending the identified discrepancies to a user device; (See at least Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system; Bull, para 0145, teaches a report of discrepancies, errors, inequalities, and/or exceptions, if any exist, is generated and sent) a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least the actual deduction amount, benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; ... sending the carrier bill to a user device (Bull, teaches consolidating throughout, see at least Bull, para 0169, teaching provide TPAs (third-party administrators) the ability to generate a bill that is consolidated from all other vendors that a specific client is using providing the client a single consolidated bill that may be broken down).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Petruzzi with a verification module... a mapping module, and a discrepancy module ... said verification module receiving a user input corresponding to at least one benefit plan recipient and comparing the user input with said benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost to update said benefits plan information benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost based at least in part on the user input; said mapping module mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; said discrepancy module identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; ... sending the identified discrepancies to a user device; a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least the actual deduction amount, benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; ... sending the carrier bill to a user device; as taught by Bull with the motivation for the administration and processing of records and payment of monies owed (Bull, para 0001). The Petruzzi invention now incorporating the Bull invention, has all the limitations of claim 16.
Regarding Claim 17, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 16, further comprising: the input port receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; the discrepancy module further identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 18, Petruzzi teaches A system for managing benefits payments, comprising: (See at least Petruzzi, Abstract; Petruzzi, column 1, lines 34-39: "An embodiment of the present invention is a retirement administration and distribution system. A client administering module administers clients using a set of client business rules. The clients include at least an operator and a plurality of customers. An account manager administers accounts and process retirement benefits of the customers.");
an input port receiving benefits plan information corresponding to benefits recipients, including an identification of at least one benefits plan having a benefits plan cycle and a benefits plan cost; (See at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13: "The account manager administers accounts and process retirement benefits of the customers. It may include an accrual account manager 222, a benefit accounts manager 224, and a retirement benefits processing module. The accrual accounts manager 222 administers accrual accounts of the customers 70's in the customer group 70 using a set of accrual business rules.... The retirement benefits processing module calculates and converts benefits of the customers 70's using a set of business rules."; Further, Petruzzi, Column 7, lines 33-40: "The business rule processing module is interfaced to at least one of the client administering module 210, the communication interface 230, the account manager 220, the employment and payroll interface 240, the self-service Website, and the UI module to process a set of business rules related to accounts and retirement benefits of the plurality of customers. The business rule processing module 260 may be located in each of these modules.", Examiner notes the UI module is the input port);
said input port receiving a payroll including, for each benefit recipient, at least one deduction slot indicating a deduction amount; (Petruzzi, column 7, lines 19-27: "The employment and payroll interface 240 imports employment and payroll information of the customers from an employment and payroll database 245. The employment and payroll interface 240 may performs functions related to employment and payroll by interacting via the employment and business rules associated with the business rule processing module 260. It may also provide data to be processed, used, incorporated, or acted upon by the business rule processing module 260 and/or the UI module 270.");
a computer including a processor for executing a cost calculation module, ... said cost calculation module determining an expected deduction amount for each benefit plan based on the benefits plan cycle and benefits plan cost; (Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 as above, where the benefits account manager is the cost calculation module, and it computes deduction amounts; see Petruzzi, column 12, lines 59-65; See at least Petruzzi, Figure 1B, teaching the computing environment);
...
an output port ... (See at least Petruzzi, Figure 2, element 270, teaches a UI (user interface) module).
Yet, Petruzzi does not appear to explicitly teach and in the same field of endeavor Bull teaches a mapping module, a discrepancy module, and a reconciliation module; said mapping module mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; (See at least Bull, para 0100, teaches the reconciliation module is configured to map at any point in time metrics; Bull, para 0046, teaches mapping data, para 0067, teaches receiving and loading data, including data from external databases, mapping data to create group IDs, mapping data, including invoice data, for consolidation and reconciliation, mapping data to identify underlying details of data sought to be consolidated or reconciled, mapping data to identify underlying benefit plan details) said discrepancy module identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; (See at least Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system; Bull, para 0145, teaches a report of discrepancies, errors, inequalities, and/or exceptions, if any exist, is generated and sent) a reconciliation module configured to identify and present options to cure the discrepancies and said reconciliation module merging said discrepancies and options into a report for display on a user device; said reconciliation module receiving user input in response to the presented options to cure discrepancies and determining a new actual deduction amount for at least one payroll; (Bull teaches a reconciliation module throughout, See at least Bull, para 0101, teaches The reconciliation module 140 is configured to reconcile against numerous data feeds, like payroll, to ensure accurate deductions and confirm metrics ...metrics like evidence of insurability are continually monitored to ensure billing accuracy prior to the payment of invoices) a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the new actual deduction amount, the benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; and ... for sending the carrier bill to a third-party device (Bull, teaches consolidating throughout, see at least Bull, para 0169, teaching provide TPAs (third-party administrators) the ability to generate a bill that is consolidated from all other vendors that a specific client is using providing the client a single consolidated bill that may be broken down).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Petruzzi with a mapping module, a discrepancy module, and a reconciliation module; said mapping module mapping at least one deduction slot and at least a portion of the deduction amount to at least one benefits plan to determine an actual deduction amount per benefits plan; said discrepancy module identifying discrepancies by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan; a reconciliation module configured to identify and present options to cure the discrepancies and said reconciliation module merging said discrepancies and options into a report for display on a user device; said reconciliation module receiving user input in response to the presented options to cure discrepancies and determining a new actual deduction amount for at least one payroll; a consolidated bill generation module executed by said processor, said consolidated bill generation module grouping benefits plans into carrier groups based on benefits plan information and merging a carrier bill based at least on the new actual deduction amount, the benefits plan cost, and the benefits plan cycle; and ... for sending the carrier bill to a third-party device as taught by Bull with the motivation for the administration and processing of records and payment of monies owed (Bull, para 0001). The Petruzzi invention now incorporating the Bull invention, has all the limitations of claim 18.
Regarding Claim 19, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 18, further comprising a payment processing module executing on the processor that communicates with an external banking system for payment of the carrier bill (See at least Petruzzi, Column 46, lines 27-end of column, teaches The automated clearing house (ACH) payments UI which communicates for payment of bill; Further, Bull, para 0157, teaches the payment processing module may communicate with the external banking system).
Regarding Claim 20, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 18, further comprising: the input port receiving a carrier invoice having a carrier invoice benefits plan cost; and the discrepancy module identifying additional discrepancies by comparing the carrier invoice benefits plan cost to the discrepancies identified by comparing each actual deduction amount per benefits plan with the expected deduction amount for each benefits plan (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; Further, See at least Bull, Abstract, teaches a system for consolidating and reconciling invoices; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system).
Regarding Claim 21, Petruzzi, now incorporating Bull, teaches The system of claim 1, further comprising a verification module receiving a user input corresponding to at least one benefit plan recipient and comparing the user input with said benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost to update said benefits plan information benefits plan information, benefits plan, benefits plan cycle, and/or benefits plan cost based at least in part on the user input (Petruzzi, teaches using business rules for benefits processing throughout, see at least Petruzzi, column 7, lines 3-13 and Figure 2, element 260, teaching business rule processing; Petruzzi, Column 26, line 39 – column 27, line 5, teaches detecting discrepancies in benefits; See Petruzzi, Figure 3; Column 8, lines 10-35; Further, see at least Bull, para 0101, The reconciliation module is configured to reconcile against numerous data feeds, like payroll, to ensure accurate deductions and confirm metrics).
Response to Arguments
Applicants arguments filed on 05/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding 35 U.5.C. § 101 rejections: Examiner has updated the 101 rejection in light of the most recent claim amendments and maintains the 101 rejection. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are found unpersuasive.
With respect to the abstract idea, the claimed invention falls within abstract groupings of certain methods of organizing human activity, mathematical concepts and mental processes as explained in the above 101 analysis. Further, Examiner respectfully notes, Applicant appears (remarks, page 12) to be confusing the additional elements (e.g. mapping module, etc.) under Step 2A: Prong One: Abstract Ideas. The additional elements are analyzed in Step 2A: Prong Two and Step 2B of the 101 analysis. With respect to Applicant’s remarks on integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the computing elements (input port, computer, processor, cost calculation module, mapping module; discrepancy module; output port; user device; consolidated bill generation module; payment processing module; reconciliation module; employee deduction reserve module; verification module; third-party device) are additional elements to perform the steps and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components and generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (such as computing, see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Examiner has reviewed Applicants claims and specification and has found only generic computing elements used in their ordinary capacity. Simply implementing the abstract idea on generic computer components is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea; the computer elements merely add the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
Further, Examiner finds Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111 because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patent eligible invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims reflect a practical application (e.g., how the claims reflect an improvement). Further, looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. Each step does no more than require a generic
computer to perform generic computer functions. The claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. In addition, the claims do not affect an improvement in any
other technology or technical field. The specification spells out different generic equipment and parameters that might be applied using the concept and the particular steps such conventional processing would entail based on the concept of information access. Thus, the claims at issue amount to nothing significantly more than instructions to apply the abstract idea using some unspecified, generic computer(s). Therefore, Applicants remarks are found unpersuasive and Examiner maintains the 101 rejection with respect to these and all depending claims unless otherwise indicated.
Regarding 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections. With respect to the prior art rejections, Applicants arguments have been fully considered but are found unpersuasive. Examiner has updated the rejections in light of the most recent claim amendments. With respect to Applicant’s remarks (pages 14-15) “Petruzzi is directed to a "retirement administration and distribution system" that administers clients using business rules, manages accrual accounts, and processes retirement benefits. Petruzzi does not disclose a system for reconciling payroll deductions with benefits enrollment to identify discrepancies.”
Examiner respectfully does not find this argument persuasive, as Bull is relied on to teach discrepancies. See at least Bull, para 0145, teaches a report of discrepancies, errors, and inequalities; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system.
Further, with respect to Applicant’s remarks (page 15) “the Office Action fails to establish that Bull teaches the specific mapping module...” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Bull teaches mapping data throughout. See at least Bull, para 0046, teaches mapping data, para 0067, teaches receiving and loading data, including data from external databases, mapping data to create group IDs, mapping data, including invoice data, for consolidation and reconciliation, mapping data to identify underlying details of data sought to be consolidated or reconciled, mapping data to identify underlying benefit plan details. Therefore, Applicant’s remarks are found unpersuasive.
Further, with respect to Applicant’s remarks (page 15) “neither reference teaches the specific discrepancy identification as claimed...” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
See at least Bull, para 0145, teaches a report of discrepancies, errors, and inequalities; Bull, para 0085-0087; para 0107-0108, the rules engine may enforce rules against data to, for example, determine discrepancies, issues, and/or exceptions concerning data within the system. Even further, see at least Bull, para 0026, teaches reconciliation module analyzing and comparing each invoice against said benefits information to detect inaccuracies.
With respect to Applicant’s remarks (pages 15-16) on “impermissible hindsight reconstruction”, Examiner respectfully disagrees, as it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Therefore, Applicants remarks are found unpersuasive and Examiner maintains the 103 rejections for all claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 REBECCA R NOVAK whose telephone number is (571)272-2524. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm 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, Lynda Jasmin can be reached on (571) 272-6782. 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.
/R.R.N./ Examiner, Art Unit 3629
/LYNDA JASMIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights