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
This action is response to the Remarks the Applicant filed on 01/28/2026.
Claims 1-20 stand rejected, objected to and are pending in this Office Action. Claims 1, 11 and 20 are independent claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 03/01/2026 are in compliance with 37 CFR 1.97(c) and therein have been considered. Its corresponding PTO-1449 have been electronically signed as attached.
Foreign Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed China Patent Application No. 202410145111.5, filed 02/01/2024, under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/28/2026 have been respectfully and fully considered. As per the Examiner’s responses, please refer to below discussions.
On Claim Rejections - 35 U.S. C § 101:
With respect to independent claims 1, 11, and 20, each recites a very minimal number of limitations )or “steps”, hereafter), the Examiner respectfully submits that the claim limitations “receiving”, “retrieving” and “causing rendered”, constitute a "Mental Process", as the claims cover performance of the limitations in the human mind, given the broadest reasonable interpretation.
The Applicant argued that “”the claims, especially as further clarified, are not directed to an abstract idea
or a process that could be performed in the human mind, as alleged in the Office Action. More
specifically, a human cannot practically perform, in his mind or on paper, "receiving, by a
server, information indicating a request for rendering a service details page of a target service on
an interface of a client device; in response to receiving the information indicating the request,
retrieving a target page template from a plurality of pre-stored page templates, wherein the page
template corresponds to a target category to which the target service belongs, wherein the target
page template comprises a plurality of fields that are empty and configured to be filled with
service information related to the target service; and causing the service details page of the
target service to be rendered on the interface of the client device through server-side rendering
or client-side rendering based on the target page template and the service information related to
the target service, wherein the rendered service details page comprises the service information
filled in the plurality of fields of the target page template," as recited in amended claim 1
( emphasis added).””, the Examiner respectfully submits that,
The step of receiving information on requesting for a page template is merely a data gathering which is well-understood, routine conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection 11. The limitation remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration.
The receiving step as recited as being performed by a server is a step at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a server as a generic computer.
The step of “retrieving a target page template from a plurality of pre-stored page templates, wherein the page template corresponds to a target category to which the target service belongs, wherein the target page template comprises a plurality of fields that are empty and configured to be filled with service information related to the target service” is, again, merely a data gathering or collecting. The limitation (or the process step) insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A Prong Two. Even and when the conclusion should be reevaluated in Step 2B, which takes into account whether the extra solution activity is well-known.
Concerning the third step of the Application “causing the service details page of the target service to be rendered on the interface of the client device through server-side rendering or client-side rendering based on the target page template and the service information related to the target service, wherein the rendered service details page comprises the service information filled in the plurality of fields of the target page template”, the Examiner respectfully submits that,
The action step is to make a page template showing details on an interface. The step is merely outputting a page template with details information filled into the fields. The data gathering and outputting can be performed by a human by observing data based on certain criteria, making judgments to validate the data, which is an essential step in ensuring the quality and accuracy of the data. There is nothing so complex in the limitation that could not be doing in the human mind.
Even when considered in combination, the three elements including its qualifying clauses represent mere instructions to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which cannot provide an inventive concept.
On Claim Rejections - 35 U.S. C § 102:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1, 20, and 11, similarly and each respectively recites
a method for page presentation, comprising [below operations];
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein the computer program, when executed by a processor, implements acts comprising: [below operations]; and
an electronic device, comprising: at least one processing unit; and at least one memory coupled to the at least one processing unit and storing instructions executable by the at least one processing unit, the instructions, when executed by the at least one processing unit, causing the device to perform acts comprising: [below operations], and each of the claims 1, 20 and 11 further recites below same set of limitations:
detecting a viewing request for a service details page of a target service from a client device;
in response to detecting the viewing request, determining, based on a target category to which the target service belongs, a target page template corresponding to the target category; and
causing the service details page of the target service to be presented at the client device based on the target page template and service information related to the target service, the service details page comprising the service information filled in the target page template.
a). In analyzing under step 2A Prong One, Does the claim recite an abstract idea law of nature or natural phenomenon? Yes.
Claims 1, 11 and 20 similarly recite two limitations (or “elements” hereafter):
receiving a viewing request for a service details page;
in response to detecting the viewing request, retrieving a target page template; and
causing the service details page of the target service to be rendered.
As claim texts drafted by a set of very minimal four limitations (or elements) of each of the three claim categories, receiving a viewing request; in response, retrieving a target page template; and causing the service details page to be rendered, are merely a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), but for the recitation of processing unit, memory and a computer readable medium which are explicitly generic computing components, including:
“receiving, by a server, information indicating a request for rendering a service details page of a target service on an interface of a client device”, is clearly an abstract idea of concepts of observation and evaluation performed in human mind. A human can observe the terms of a text content and, based on observations and judgments, receive a page of information with details. There is nothing so complex in the limitation that could not be doing in the human mind.
In the above described activities, for example, an on-line ticket selling agent receiving a purchasing request for a specific sport game ticket, is a similar act that may or not need the help of using paper and pencil for taking note;
“in response to detecting the viewing request, retrieving a target page template from a plurality of pre-stored page templates, wherein the target page template corresponds to target category to which the target service belongs, wherein the target page template comprises a plurality of fields that are empty and configured to be filled with service information related to the target service” is clearly an abstract idea of concepts of evaluation and judgment. Even with additional descriptions to some details of the page template retrieved, a human can retrieve one specific page template out of a plurality based on judgement during retrieving an item out of a stock and further can observe details of the page template and fill up the empty fields based on human opinion on selecting the values.
There is nothing so complex in the limitation that could not be done in the human mind.
In the human routines of the above similar operation step as example of ticket selling, the agent determines an empty ticket corresponding to a specific category of game, the corresponding information such as fare, game date/time, and designated seat information is to be filled or printed on the ticket for presenting to the requesting client when all details of ticket sale completed; and
“causing the service details page of the target service to be rendered on the interface of the client device through server-side rendering or client-side rendering based on the target page template and the service information related to the target service, wherein the rendered service details page comprises the service information filled in the plurality of fields of the target page template” is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.0S(f)) and therefore is clearly some concepts of evaluation and judgment under the grouping of abstract ideas.
As the above example of human routine activities of selling sport game ticket, specific pre-printed empty ticket game ticket (as a template page) is withdrawn, and based on the request, corresponding information such as fare, game date/time, and designated seat information is filled or printed on the ticket for presenting to the requesting client when all details of ticket sale completed.
With respect to the above process of very limited number of operation limitations, there isn’t any qualifying or refining condition(s) to the limitations as included and analyzed in the above descriptions that provides nothing that precludes the step from practically being conceptually performed in the mind by observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion or from being grouped as Mental Processes.
With respect to all limitations as recited, all can be analogously interpreted as ticket selling, the limitations as a whole clearly belongs to a group of abstract ideas as mental process as concepts can be performed in the human mind and also belongs, as whole, a group of abstract ideas as mental processes.
As such, the set of limitations is clearly an abstract idea of concepts of observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement that can be performed in human mind optionally with help of paper and pencil. Reciting of processing unit, memory and a computer readable medium, all are generic computer components, nothing in the claim elements precludes the steps from practically being conceptually performed in the mind.
Accordingly, other than reciting “processing unit”, “memory” and “a computer readable medium”, the limitations are mental processes as concepts can be performed by human mind through observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement. With or without the help of paper and pencil, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being conceptually performed in the mind.
The claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the steps in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” (thinking) that “can be performed in the human mind, or by a human” to be an abstract idea, as the Examiner utilized an example of ticket selling as a similar activity.
Therefore, it is the steps that can be performed mentally, or which are the equivalent of human mental work, are unpatentable abstract ideas that the ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ are open to all.
Accordingly, claims 1, 11 and 20 recite an abstract idea.
b) In analyzing under step 2A Prong Two, Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? NO.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites additional elements – “server”, “processing unit”, “memory” and “a computer readable storage medium”. The additional components are generic computer components even being recited as additional limitations, however, do not preclude the claims from reciting an abstract idea. For instance, as the above detailed analysis on the three minimal limitations as abstract ideas that can be performed mentally in mind by human, without reciting any “additional element” to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
The processes of receiving necessities for performing an action and providing indication of completed such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components, processing unit(s), memory and computer readable medium for the processes. That is, the limitations represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp). Accordingly, even considering all the elements as 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. As such, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
c) In analyzing under step 2B, does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? NO
The claims 1, 11 and 20 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, there is simply no additional elements adding to the already analyzed very few minimal steps of performing action . The steps, represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity previously known to the industry and are specified at a high level of generality, and in the context of the limitations reciting performing action that can be practically performed in the human mind and may be considered to fall within the mental process and mathematical concepts groupings.
As such, the limitations represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp). The claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-10 and 12-19 include all the limitations of claims 1 and 11, respectively. Therefore, claims 2-10 and 12-19 recite the same abstract idea of concepts of in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement practically being performed in the mind, and the ana lysis must therefore proceed to Step 2A Prong Two.
Accordingly, dependent claims 2-10 and 12-19 recite no additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception as defined in independent claims 1 and 11, respectively.
In particularly:
Claims 2 and 12 similarly recite the limitation “wherein the target page template is used to define a structured page format for information related to the target category, and the target page template at least comprises a definition of key-value pairs for the information related to the target category and key information in the key-value pairs”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as ticket selling as example above, including ticket being of predefined and structured format and corresponding values for the fields fare, game date/time, and designated seat information on the ticket constituting the key-value pairs, as described above for claims 1 and 11 above. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitation represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 3 and 13 similarly recite the limitation “wherein causing the service details page to be presented at the client device comprises: causing the service details page to be presented at the client device through server-side rendering or client-side rendering”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, taking the ticket selling above as an example, including rendering corresponding values for the fields fare, game date/time, and designated seat information on the ticket by filling up or printing for readying the ticket selling, as described above for claims 2 and 12 above. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitations represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 4 and 14 similarly recite the limitations “wherein determining the target page template corresponding to the target category comprises:
maintaining a plurality of page templates corresponding to a plurality of categories respectively, the plurality of categories comprising the target category; and
determining, from the plurality of categories, the target page template corresponding to the target category based on the target category to which the target service belongs”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as ticket selling as example above, including the box office maintaining different categories of preprinted empty games tickets for different types of sports. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitations represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 5 and 15 similarly recite the limitations “receiving a service recommendation request from a service provider of the target service” and “in response to the service recommendation request, acquiring, based on the target page template, the service information for filling in the target page template from the service provider”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as ticket selling as example above, including recommending corresponding values for the fields fare, game date/time, and designated seat information on the ticket by filling up or printing for readying the ticket selling, as previously described above for claims 2 and 12”. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitation represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible. The claims do not include additional element(s)
Claims 6 and 16 similarly recite the limitations “wherein acquiring the service information for filling in the target page template comprises:
determining at least a part of the service information from historical information provided by the service provider; and
sending an information acquisition request to the service provider to request to acquire other parts of the service information”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as ticket selling as example above, including determining if the ticket purchaser being a season ticket holder and being assigned seat to specific areas, and receiving/reviewing ticket selling information via visual means, as generally described for claims 1 and 11 above. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitation represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 6 and 16 similarly recite the limitations “generating a preview of the service details page based on the service information and the target page template corresponding to the target category” and “performing content inspection based on the preview of the service details page”.
The limitations are clearly an abstract idea of concepts of observation and evaluation performed in human mind. In the above described ticket selling as example above, including filling up or printing game corresponding information on appropriate empty ticket for the game, and inspecting correct information on the printed ticket. That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitations represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 7 and 17 similarly recite the limitations “generating a preview of the service details page based on the service information and the target page template corresponding to the target category” and
performing content inspection based on the preview of the service details page”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as the ticket selling as example described above, including filling up or printing ticket usage information on the empty ticket for readying the ticket as proper as generally described for claims 1 and 11 above and That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitation represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 8 and 18 similarly recite the limitations “wherein detecting the viewing request for the service details page of the target service from the client device comprises:
detecting a trigger operation for a recommended content item from the client device, the recommended content item being delivered in a content presentation opportunity to recommend the target service; and
in response to the trigger operation, determining the viewing request”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as ticket selling as an example for claims 1 and 11, including the box office recommending the best available ticket to the ticket purchase in responding the purchaser’s request.
That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitation represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 9 and 19 similarly recite the limitation “wherein the service details page further comprises a form for collecting predetermined form information”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as ticket selling as an example generally described for claims 1 and 11, including the box office collecting information regarding the service and/or the specific ticket quality.
That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitation represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “wherein the collected predetermined form information is used to determine intention degree of users for the target service”.
As recited as concepts performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, opinion and judgement of information, as ticket selling as an example generally described for claims 1 and 11, including the box office collecting information regarding the service and/or the specific ticket quality for improvement of the services provided by the ticket box office.
That is, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind gathering and viewing data, and in the context of the limitations encompasses the user mentally and/or manually viewing and evaluating, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. As such, the limitation represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not include additional element(s) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible.
In conclusion, the limitations of the claims 2-10 and 12-19 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, all the elements of the claims as discussed and analyzed above represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity previously known to the industry and are specified at a high level of generality (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp). The claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by
Fiori et al.: “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GENERATION OF CUSTOMIZED INSURANCE PROPOSALS” (United States Patent Application Publication US 20130332204 A1, DATE FILED 2013-12-12, Date Filed 2013-03-15, hereafter “Fiori”).
As per claim 1, Fiori teaches a method for page presentation, comprising:
receiving, by a server, information indicating a request for rendering a service details page of a target service on an interface of a client device (See Figs. 7-8 and [0093], a welcome screen of a kind that may be downloaded from the new business computer system 204 to the agent computer 118. The agent reads on a client and the screen teaches the interface);
in response to receiving the information indicating the request, retrieving a target page template from a plurality of pre-stored page templates (See Figs. 7-8 and [0094], [0094] As a result of the agent/user selecting menu option 704 from the screen display of FIG. 7, the new business computer system 204 and the agency front end application 402 may download to the agent computer 118 a screen display like that shown in FIG. 8. The purpose of the latter screen display is to enable and launch a search (block 606, FIG. 6) for a customer classification that matches the prospective insured represented by the agent/user. Here the downloading teaches the retrieving),
where in the target page template corresponds to a target category to which the target service belongs (See Figs. 9-10, [0095]-[0100], the agent/user may enter text to identify the type of enterprise that is to be insured, for this example, it is assumed to have the customer as "dentist" as type of business. Screen of the agent computer displayed template page form and information downloaded from business computer system and agency front end application. Here the type of enterprise, dentist in the example, teaches target category to which the target service belongs to “to be insured”),
wherein the target page template comprises a plurality of fields that are empty and configured to be filled with service information related to the target service (See Figs. 11-12, [0101]-[0102], the customer information to be entered may include the customer's name, contact information, etc. When the agent/user has completed entering this information, he/she may proceed to the next step by actuating the button shown at 1102 in the FIG. 11 screen display and in response, the new business computer system 204 and the agency front end application 402 may download to the agent computer 118 a screen display like that shown in FIG. 12. The purpose of the FIG. 12 screen display is for entry of rating information. he insured's name and contact information are carried forward at 1404 from earlier screens. At 1406, the requested policy term is indicated. ); and
causing the service details page of the target service to be rendered on the interface of the client device through server-side rendering or client-side rendering based on the target page template and the service information related to the target service (See Figs. 13-14, [0103]-[0106], a response to a given eligibility question may cause one or more other eligibility questions to be presented to the user. After entering the responses at the "radio buttons" provided at 1304 on worker’s compensation questions, the agent/user may actuate the "continue" button 1306. If the responses to the eligibility questions are satisfactory, then the new business computer system 204 and the agency front end application 402 may respond by downloading to the agent computer 118 a screen display like that shown in FIG. 14. The purpose of the FIG. 14 screen display is to allow the agent/user to enter policy information with respect to the requested insurance policy. Because this information may affect the amount of the premium that will be quoted, it too may be considered "rating information". The agent/user's responses to the eligibility questions are indicated. The insured's name and contact information are carried forward at 1404 from earlier screens. At 1406, the requested policy term is indicated. Here the requested policy term is indicated reads on the rendering or client-side rendering based on the target page template and the service information related to the target service),
wherein the rendered service details page comprises the service information filled in the plurality of fields of the target page template (See Fig. 15 and [0107], actuates the "continue" button 1408, the new business computer system 204 and the agency front end application 402 may respond by downloading to the agent computer 118 a screen display like that shown in FIG. 15. The FIG. 15 display screen allows the agent/user to enter or confirm information relating to the location of the risk. Moreover, elements of the FIG. 15 screen display allow the agent/user to enter information that is an input for the rating process, and so is considered to be rating information. A confirmed information relating to the location of the risk) teaches the service is rendered).
As per claim 2, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the target page template is used to define a structured page format for information related to the target category (See Fig. 8 and [0095], the business type class description, for example, dentist, is a field of fixed length, but no shorter than three), and
the target page template at least comprises a definition of key-value pairs for the information related to the target category and key information in the key-value pairs (See Figs. 9-10, [0095]-[0100], each of the field to be filled with a value, is described with a description as the definition to the field).
As per claim 3, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein determining the target page template corresponding to the target category comprises:
maintaining a plurality of page templates corresponding to a plurality of categories respectively (See Fig. 9 and [0097], the customer classifications matches the proposed insured. For purposes of this example, it is assumed that the correct customer classification is the one listed at 904, i.e. class code 65671, "Medical Office-Dentist". The customer classifications teaches the categories each is clickable for leading to specific class details for category page templates),
the plurality of categories comprising the target category (See Fig. 10 and [0100], the screen display provides further information about the selected customer classification, including a formal definition of the classification and eligibility criteria established by the insurance company.); and
determining, from the plurality of categories, the target page template corresponding to the target category based on the target category to which the target service belongs (See Fig. 10 and [0100], with the button 1002 and accompanying statement 1004, the screen display asks the agent/user to verify that the proposed risk meets the definition and eligibility criteria. Before doing so, the agent/user may interact with a menu provided at 1006 to get information about the applicable underwriting questions for the type of insurance coverage that is to be obtained.).
As per claim 5, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a service recommendation request from a service provider of the target service (See Figs. 12-17 and [0102]-[0110], the agent/user is allowed to indicate what type of insurance coverage is being requested. As an example, workers' compensation coverage is being sought. Other information may be entered in the lower portion of the screen display. The agent/user may actuate the "next" button 1206 to proceed to the next stages of the processes, including confirming information related to location of the risk, rating, payroll, workers covered, underwriting, ,,, etc.); and
in response to the service recommendation request, acquiring, based on the target page template, the service information for filling in the target page template from the service provider (See Figs 18-20, [0111]-[0128], non-bindable and bindable premium quotations are generated for the agent/user to buy or reserve).
As per claim 6, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein acquiring the service information for filling in the target page template comprises:
determining at least a part of the service information from historical information provided by the service provider (See Fig. 20 and [0118], a salient feature of the format of the FIG. 20 screen display is that there are two quotation sections included therein, namely an original quotation section 2002 and a second (or copy) quotation section 2004; and Fig. 3 and [0065], the storage devices 308 may store the rating rules database 210, the business rules database 214, and the proposal database 218 as referred to above in connection with FIG. 2. In addition, the storage devices 308 may store a database 324 for storing data relating to pending or outstanding insurance premium quotations); and
sending an information acquisition request to the service provider to request to acquire other parts of the service information (See Fig. 3 and [0065], the storage devices 308 may store the rating rules database 210, the business rules database 214, and the proposal database 218 as referred to above in connection with FIG. 2. In addition, the storage devices 308 may store a database 324 for storing data relating to pending or outstanding insurance premium quotations).
As per claim 7, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 5, further comprising:
generating a preview of the service details page based on the service information and the target page template corresponding to the target category (See Fig. 18 and [0111], the agent/user did not answer all of the underwriting questions, and that the resulting premium quotation is "non-bindable", as indicated at 1802 in FIG. 18. As is understood by those who are skilled in the art, "non-bindable" means that the quotation is not available for acceptance by the agent/user, but rather is subject to satisfactory completion of the responses to the underwriting questions.); and
performing content inspection based on the preview of the service details page (See FIG. 19 and [0113], a screen display that the new business computer system 204 and the agency front end application 402 may download to the agent computer 118 in response to actuation by the agent/user of the "continue" button 1704 on the underwriting questions screen display (FIG. 17). For the FIG. 19 example screen display, it is assumed that the agent/user satisfactorily answered all of the underwriting questions and that no referral to a human underwriter is needed.).
As per claim 8, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein receiving the information indicating the request for rendering the service details page of the target service on the interface of the client device comprises:
detecting a trigger operation for a recommended content item from the client device, the recommended content item being delivered in a content presentation opportunity to recommend the target service (See Fig. 19, [0113] and [0117], in response to actuation by the agent/user of the "continue" button 1704 on the underwriting questions screen display, the agent/user is permitted to accept the quotation and obtain the desired insurance coverage by actuating the "buy" button indicated at 1906 in the FIG. 19 screen display and as an alternative to actuating the "buy" button 1906, the agent/user may actuate the "reserve" button indicated at 1912 in FIG. 19. This invokes the "reserve" function.); and
in response to the trigger operation, determining the viewing request (See Figs. 18-20, [0118], Another function that is accessible by the agent/user via the FIG. 19 screen display is a "copy" function, to be invoked by actuation of the "copy" option provided at 1914 in FIG. 19. In response to actuation of the "copy" option, the new business computer system 204 and the agency front end application 402 may download to the agent computer 118 a screen display in the format shown in FIG. 20. A salient feature of the format of the FIG. 20 screen display is that there are two quotation sections included therein, namely an original quotation section 2002 and a second (or copy) quotation section 2004.).
As per claim 9, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the service details page further comprises a form for collecting predetermined form information (See Fig. 20 and [0118], a salient feature of the format of the FIG. 20 screen display is that there are two quotation sections included therein, namely an original quotation section 2002 and a second (or copy) quotation section 2004.).
As per claim 10, Fiori teaches the method according to claim 9, wherein the collected predetermined form information is used to determine intention degree of users for the target service (See Fig. 3 and [0064], ).
As per claims 11-19, the claims recite an comprising at least one processing unit and at least one memory coupled to the at least one processing unit and storing instructions executable by the at least one processing unit, the instructions, when executed by the at least one processing unit, causing the device to perform acts (See Fiori: Fig. 3 and [0064], the storage devices 308 are coupled for data communication with the processor 302 and may comprise any appropriate information storage device, including combinations of magnetic storage devices (e.g., magnetic tape and hard disk drives), optical storage devices, and/or semiconductor memory devices (such as Random Access Memory (RAM) devices and Read Only Memory (ROM) devices). At least some of these devices may be considered computer-readable storage media, or may include such media. The storage devices 308 may store the above-mentioned software program instructions and/or other program instructions to control the processing module 302 such that the new business computer system 204 provides desired functionality, as described herein. Thus, the storage devices 308 store one or more programs for controlling he processing module 302. The processing module 302 performs instructions of the programs) that, when executed by the processor configured to execute a method) comprising the steps as recited in the claims 1-9 above, respectively, and as rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Fiori.
Accordingly, claims 11-19 are rejected along the same rationale that rejected claims 1-9 above, respectively.
As per claim 20, the claim recites a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein the computer program (See Fiori: Fig. 3 and [0064], the storage devices 308 are coupled for data communication with the processor 302 and may comprise any appropriate information storage device, including combinations of magnetic storage devices (e.g., magnetic tape and hard disk drives), optical storage devices, and/or semiconductor memory devices (such as Random Access Memory (RAM) devices and Read Only Memory (ROM) devices). At least some of these devices may be considered computer-readable storage media, or may include such media. The storage devices 308 may store the above-mentioned software program instructions and/or other program instructions to control the processing module 302 such that the new business computer system 204 provides desired functionality, as described herein. Thus, the storage devices 308 store one or more programs for controlling he processing module 302. The processing module 302 performs instructions of the programs) comprising the steps as recited in the claim 1 above and as rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Fiori.
Accordingly, claim 20 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected claim 1.
Related Prior Arts
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited.
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.
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-5] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984) In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004). >See also MPEP §2123.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUEN S LU whose telephone number is (571)272-4114. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8-19, Mid-Flex 2 hours.
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, Mr. Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached on 571-270-1760. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
KUEN S LU /Kuen S Lu/
Art Unit 2156
Primary Patent Examiner
March 19, 2026