DETAILED ACTION
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-8 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Application No. 17/661,875. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claims
Instant Application
App#: 17/661,875
1-8
1. A cloud service platform that is integrated over a network with a local application operating on a remote device, comprising:
one or more processors; and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processors, configure the processor to operate, for the cloud service platform:
a field management engine to define fields comprising a first field and a second field used by the cloud service platform;
an event streams engine to receive a message from the local application, the message comprising a form having the first field and a second field of the local application; and
a field bridge engine to:
receive the form from the event streams engine;
receive first field data for the first field and second field data for the second field from either the cloud service platform or a dealer management system;
apply the first field data to the first field of the form and the second field data to the second field of the form based on the definition; and provide the form to a print service for presentation.
2. The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the first field data for the first field is applied to the form according to a workflow for the form, the workflow being provided to the cloud service platform by the local application.
3. The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the field management engine is further to store the definition for the first field in a field definition service of the cloud service platform.
4. The cloud service platform of claim 3, wherein the field definition service is to provide the definition for the first field to a telemetry service of the cloud service platform.
5. The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the field bridge engine is further to store the first field data for the first field in a field data service of the cloud service platform.
6. The cloud service platform of claim 5, wherein the field data service is to indicate to a telemetry service of the cloud service platform that the first field has been used.
7. The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the field bridge engine is to be launched in response to a signal made by a bridge launcher of the local application.
1. (original) A cloud service platform that is integrated over a network with a local application operating on a remote device, comprising:
one or more processors; and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processors, configure the processor to operate, for the cloud service platform:
a field management engine to create a definition of a first field used by the cloud service platform;
an event streams engine to receive a message from the local application, the message comprising a form having the first field and a second field of the local application; and
a field bridge engine to:
receive first field data for the first field and second field data for the second field from a user of the local application; and
apply the first field data to the first field of the form and the second field data in the second field of the form.
2. (original) The remote device of claim 1, wherein the first field data for the first field is applied to the form according to a workflow for the form, the workflow being provided to the cloud service platform by the local application.
3. (original) The remote device of claim 1, wherein the field management engine is further to store the definition for the first field in a field definition service of the cloud service platform.
4. (original) The remote device of claim 3, wherein the field definition service is to provide the definition for the first field to a telemetry service of the cloud service platform.
5. (original) The remote device of claim 1, wherein the field bridge engine is further to store the first field data for the first field in a field data service of the cloud service platform.
6. (original) The remote device of claim 5, wherein the field data service is to indicate to a telemetry service of the cloud service platform that the first field has been used.
7. (original) The remote device of claim 1, wherein the field bridge engine is to be launched in response to a signal made by a bridge launcher of the local application.
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.
Claims 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over Cotton et al. (US 2018/0108058 A1).
For claim 1, Cotton et al. teaches:
A cloud service platform that is integrated over a network with a local application operating on a remote device [storage being cloud based for local dealer application, 0058: Cotton], comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processors, configure the processor to operate, for the cloud service platform: a field management engine to define fields comprising a first field and a second field used by the cloud service platform [dealer management system for transforming and handling data fields. 0077: Cotton]; an event streams engine to receive a message from the local application, the message comprising a form having the first field and a second field of the local application [message transmittal unit to send data to dealer, 0097: Cotton]; and a field bridge engine to: receive the form from the event streams engine [receiving from system, 0072-0073: Cotton]; receive first field data for the first field and second field data for the second field from either the cloud service platform or a dealer management system [harmonizing data uniformly between applications in various systems, 0196: Cotton]; apply the first field data to the first field of the form and the second field data to the second field of the form based on the definition [first and second format to first and second data set system respectively, 0196: Cotton]; and provide the form to a print service for presentation [form presented to user, 0109: Cotton].
For claim 2, Cotton et al. teaches:
The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the first field data for the first field is applied to the form according to a workflow for the form, the workflow being provided to the cloud service platform by the local application [transferring of data to database based on flow, 0193; storage being cloud based, 0058: Cotton].
For claim 3, Cotton et al. teaches:
The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the field management engine is further to store the definition for the first field in a field definition service of the cloud service platform [defined fields for storing, 0126: Cotton].
For claim 4, Cotton et al. teaches:
The cloud service platform of claim 3, wherein the field definition service is to provide the definition for the first field to a telemetry service of the cloud service platform [fields based on measured data, 0202: Cotton].
For claim 5, Cotton et al. teaches:
The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the field bridge engine is further to store the first field data for the first field in a field data service of the cloud service platform [harmonizing and storing in multiple formats and applications, 0196: Cotton].
For claim 6, Cotton et al. teaches:
The cloud service platform of claim 5, wherein the field data service is to indicate to a telemetry service of the cloud service platform that the first field has been used [checking to see if field is used, 0077: Cotton].
For claim 7, Cotton et al. teaches:
The cloud service platform of claim 1, wherein the field bridge engine is to be launched in response to a signal made by a bridge launcher of the local application [harmonizing uniformly across systems, 0196: Cotton].
Claim 8 is a method of the device taught by claim 1. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons stated above.
For claim 9, Cotton et al. teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein the form is the first form, the method further comprising applying the first and second field data to a second form [second format to second data set system, 0196: Cotton].
For claim 10, Cotton et al. teaches:
The method of claim 9, further comprising providing the first form and the second form to a print service [fields based on measured data, 0202: Cotton].
For claim 11, Cotton et al. teaches:
The method of claim 9, further comprising receiving the second form from a forms database [information from sources in database with fields, 0068: Cotton].
For claim 12, Cotton et al. teaches:
The method of claim 9, further comprising receiving the second form from the local application [customer data sources retrieved from local storage, 0101: Cotton].
For claim 13, Cotton et al. teaches:
The method of claim 8, further comprising: providing, in response to the signal, to a user of the local application, a prompt to enter field data of the first field; and receiving the first filed data responsive to the prompt [when there is an incentive a prompt for data is presented and data received, 0100: Cotton].
For claim 14, Cotton et al. teaches:
The method of claim 13, wherein the prompt to enter the field data is organized according to a domain of the first field [prompt to enter data based on type, 0100: Cotton].
For claim 15, Cotton et al. teaches:
The method of claim 8, further comprising recording that the field data was applied to the first form in telemetry data for the cloud service platform [fields based on measured data, 0202: Cotton].
Claim 16 is a medium of the device taught by claim 1. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 17 is a medium of the method taught by claim 9. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 9 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 18 is a medium of the method taught by claim 11. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 11 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 19 is a medium of the method taught by claim 12. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 12 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 20 is a medium of the method taught by claim 13. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 13 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 21 is a medium of the method taught by claim 14. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 14 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 22 is a medium of the method taught by claim 15. Cotton et al. teaches the limitations of claim 15 for the reasons stated above
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 20, 2026 have been fully considered and the arguments do not overcome the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection.
The Double Patenting Rejection is held in abeyance by the applicant until such
time as all claims are found otherwise allowable.
Applicant argues that Cotton et al. (US 2018/0108058 A1) does not teach “a field
management engine to define fields comprising a first field and a second field used by the cloud service platform” and "an event streams engine to receive a message from the local application, the message comprising a form having the first field and a second field of the local application".
Cotton et al. Lu et al. teaches a service platform that has applications on local
servers but data stored on cloud services [0058: Cotton], and also teaches a DMS system with data that can handle dealer data streams and adjust/condition data streams for multiple fields [0077: Cotton]. Cotton et al. also teaches dealer information system that derives field data from the data streams and provides it as an information from the local application of data of the dealership system [0097 and Figure 7A: Cotton].
Thus, Cotton et al. teaches “a field management engine to define fields
comprising a first field and a second field used by the cloud service platform” and "an event streams engine to receive a message from the local application, the message comprising a form having the first field and a second field of the local application".
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 extension fee 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 AJITH M JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-1763. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday: Flexible Hours.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Apu Mofiz can be reached on 571-272-4080. 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.
8/11/2026
/AJITH JACOB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2161
Prosecution Insights