Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action. This action is responsive to Applicant’s application filed 03/05/2025.
Priority
3. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a Continuation of 18409306 , filed 01/10/2024 ,now U.S. Patent # 12271371, 18409306 Claims Priority from Provisional Application 63480902 , filed 01/20/2023 is acknowledged.
Since the Continuation application relied on part of the priority document (Continuation), the claim of priority will be considered on a claim-by-claim basis. The priority date of the instant application is at least 03/05/2025 (the filing date), but depending upon the specific material claimed, could be as early as 01/20/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The references listed in the IDS filed 03/05/2025 has been considered. A copy of the signed or initialed IDS is hereby attached.
.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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).
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,271,371. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are substantially similar in scope and they use the same limitations.
The following table shows the claims 1-20 in Instant Application that are rejected by corresponding claim(s) 1-20 in US Patent No. 12,271,371.
Instant Application
US 12,271,371
1. A method comprising:
receiving, by a central computer comprising a processor, a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising a real-time event streaming module, an aggregator module, and a workflow module comprising an event validator and one or more aggregation processors, and an events database, a
plurality of event data packets associated with a plurality of transactions from a plurality of service provider computers, a plurality of user devices, and a logistics platform;
providing, by the real-time event streaming module to the aggregator module, the event data packets in real-time;
aggregating, by the aggregator module, the event data packets according to their corresponding transactions to form a plurality of event data packet groups; and
for each event data packet group in the plurality of event data packet groups:
validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group,
after validating the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, storing the event data packets in the event data packets in the event data packet group in the events database, and processing, by the one or more aggregation processors, stored the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein processing
the event data packets in the event data packet group comprises creating one or more journal entries using the event data in the event data packets.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the event
data packets each comprise an event identifier.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the event
data packet groups are aggregated according to delivery identifiers.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein validating the event data comprises determining that the
event data in the event data packets are consistent.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the aggregator module comprises one or more filters for filtering the event data packets.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the one or more filters comprise a personal identifiable information (PII) filter.
8. The method of claim 6, wherein the one or more filters comprise a delivery event filter.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of user devices includes end user devices and transporter user devices, the transporter user devices used by transporters that operate transporter vehicles.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the transactions are delivery transactions.
11. A central server computer comprising:
a processor;
an events database; and
a non-transitory computer readable medium, the non-transitory computer readable
medium comprising a real-time event streaming module, an aggregator module, and a workflow module comprising an event validator and one or more aggregation processors, wherein the real-time event
streaming module comprises code for receiving a plurality of event data packets
associated with a plurality of transactions from a plurality of service provider computers, a plurality of user devices, and a logistics platform; and
the aggregator module comprises code
for receiving the event data packets in real-time from the real-time event streaming module
and aggregating the event data packets according to their corresponding transactions to form a plurality of event data packet groups, and for each event data packet group in the plurality of event data packet groups:
validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group,
after validating the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, storing the event data packets in the event data packets in the event data packet group in the
events database, and processing, by the one or more aggregation processors, stored the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group.
12. The central server computer of claim 11,
wherein the real-time event streaming module
is a first real-time event streaming module, and wherein the non-transitory computer readable medium further comprises a second real-time event streaming module, which preprocesses the event data packets after receiving the plurality of event data packets from the first real-time event streaming module.
13. The central server computer of claim 12, wherein the aggregator module comprises one or more filters for filtering the event data packets before the plurality of event data packets are received by the second real-time event streaming module.
14 The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the event data packet groups are aggregated according to event identifiers.
15. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the events database is a persistent memory data storage.
16. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the aggregator module aggregates the event data packets while they are stored in a temporary memory storage.
17. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the plurality of user devices includes end user devices and transporter user devices, the transporter user devices used by transporters that operate transporter vehicles.
18. A system comprising:
a central server computer comprising a
processor, an events database, and a non-
transitory computer readable medium, the non-transitory computer readable medium
comprising a real-time event streaming
module, an aggregator module, and a workflow module comprising an event validator and one or more aggregation processors, wherein the real-time event streaming module
comprises code for receiving a plurality of
event data packets associated with a plurality of transactions from a plurality of service provider computers, a plurality of user devices,
and a logistics platform, the aggregator module comprises code for receiving the event data packets in real-time from the real-time event streaming module and aggregating the event data packets according to their
corresponding transactions to form a plurality
of event data packet groups, and for each event data packet group in the plurality of event data packet groups:
validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group,
after validating the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, storing the event data packets in the event data packets in the event data packet group in the
events database, and processing, by the one or more aggregation processors, stored the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group;
and the logistics platform.
19. The system of claim 18, further comprising the plurality of user devices, wherein the plurality of user devices includes transporter end user devices.
20. The system of claim 18, wherein the logistics platform is configured to coordinate transporters as the transporters deliver items to end users.
1. A method comprising:
receiving, by a central computer comprising a processor, a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising a real-time event streaming module, an aggregator module, and a workflow module comprising an event validator and one or more aggregation processors, and an events database, a plurality of event data packets associated with a plurality of transactions from a plurality of service provider computers, a plurality of user devices, and a logistics platform;
providing, by the real-time event streaming module to the aggregator module, the event data packets in real-time;
aggregating, by the aggregator module, the event data packets according to their corresponding transactions to form a plurality of event data packet groups; and
for each event data packet group in the plurality of event data packet groups:
validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group by determining that a total of pay in amounts associated with the event data packets equals a total of pay out amounts associated with the event data packets, after validating the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, storing the event data packets in the event data packets in the event data packet group in the events database, and processing, by the one or more aggregation processors, the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, wherein processing the event data comprises matching specific data in the event data with one or more accounting numbers.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein processing the event data packets in the event data packet group further comprises creating one or more journal entries using the event data in the event data packets.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the event data packets each comprise an event identifier.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the event data packet groups are aggregated according to delivery identifiers.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein validating the event data further comprises determining that the event data in the event data packets are consistent.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the aggregator module comprises one or more filters for filtering the event data packets.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the one or more filters comprise a personal identifiable information (PII) filter.
8. The method of claim 6, wherein the one or more filters comprise a delivery event filter.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of user devices includes end user devices and transporter user devices, the transporter user devices used by transporters that operate transporter vehicles.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the transactions are delivery transactions.
11. A central server computer comprising:
a processor;
an events database; and
a non-transitory computer readable medium, the non-transitory computer readable medium comprising a real-time event streaming module, an aggregator module, and a workflow module comprising an event validator and one or more aggregation processors, wherein the real-time event streaming module comprises code for receiving a plurality of event data packets associated with a plurality of transactions from a plurality of service provider computers, a plurality of user devices, and a logistics platform, and
the aggregator module comprises code for receiving the event data packets in real-time from the real-time event streaming module and aggregating the event data packets according to corresponding transactions to form a plurality of event data packet groups, and for each event data packet group in the plurality of event data packet groups:
validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group by determining that a total of pay in amounts associated with the event data packets equals a total of pay out amounts associated with the event data packets, after validating the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, storing the event data packets in the event data packets in the event data packet group in the events database, and processing, by the one or more aggregation processors,
the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, wherein processing the event data comprises matching specific data in the event data with one or more accounting numbers.
12. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the real-time event streaming module is a first real-time event streaming module, and wherein the non-transitory computer readable medium further comprises a second real-time event streaming module, which preprocesses the event data packets after receiving the plurality of event data packets from the first real-time event streaming module.
13. The central server computer of claim 12, wherein the aggregator module comprises one or more filters for filtering the event data packets before the plurality of event data packets are received by the second real-time event streaming module.
14. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the event data packet groups are aggregated according to event identifiers.
15. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the events database is a persistent memory data storage.
16. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the aggregator module aggregates the event data packets while the event data packets are stored in a temporary memory storage.
17. The central server computer of claim 11, wherein the plurality of user devices includes end user devices and transporter user devices, the transporter user devices used by transporters that operate transporter vehicles.
18. A system comprising:
a central server computer comprising a processor, an events database, and a non-transitory computer readable medium, the non-transitory computer readable medium comprising a real-time event streaming module, an aggregator module, and a workflow module comprising an event validator and one or more aggregation processors, wherein the real-time event streaming module comprises code for receiving a plurality of event data packets associated with a plurality of transactions from a plurality of service provider computers, a plurality of user devices, and a logistics platform, the aggregator module comprises code for receiving the event data packets in real-time from the real-time event streaming module and aggregating the
event data packets according to corresponding transactions to form a plurality of event data packet groups, and for each event data packet group in the plurality of event data packet groups:
validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group by determining that a total of pay in amounts associated with the event data packets equals a total of pay out amounts associated with the event data packets, after validating the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, storing the event data packets in the event data packets in the event data packet group in the events database, and processing, by the one
or more aggregation processors, the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, wherein processing the event data comprises matching specific data in the event data with one or more accounting numbers;
and the logistics platform.
19. The system of claim 18, further comprising the plurality of user devices, wherein the plurality of user devices includes transporter end user devices.
20. The system of claim 18, wherein the logistics platform is configured to coordinate transporters as the transporters deliver items to end users.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are substantially similar in scope and they use the same limitations.
After analyzing the language of the claims, it is clear that claims 1-20 are merely an obvious variation of claims 1-20 of US Patent No. 12,271,371. It is clear that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims. Therefore, these two sets of claims are not patentably distinct.
Claim Objection
The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
6. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 18, the claim recites “their” which is unclear what “their” corresponding to. Also, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the event data packets”.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “they” which is unclear what “they” corresponding to. Also, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the event data packets”.
The art rejection for claims 1, 11, 16, and 18 should therefore be considered as a best effort of the examiner, given the unclarity of the scope of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Meyer et al.(US Patent Publication No. 2013/0336235 A1, hereinafter “Meyer”) in view of Pantaliano et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2013/0080348 A1, hereinafter “Pantaliano”).
As to Claim 1, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“A method comprising:” as a method for providing offers over a mobile communications platform, the method comprises providing a first platform associated with a mobile virtual network enabler (MVNE); providing a second platform which is integrated with said first platform and which has a plurality of tenants associated therewith (paragraph 0029).
“receiving, by a central computer comprising a processor, a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising a real-time event streaming module, an aggregator module, and a workflow module comprising an event validator and one or more aggregation processors, and an events database, a plurality of event data packets associated with a plurality of transactions from a plurality of service provider computers, a plurality of user devices, and a logistics platform” as aggregator MVNEs: these offer consulting and integration services and have bundled all of the back-office network components through alliances. These promote their ability to quickly provide order-to-cash solutions to mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs). Aggregator MVNEs with their own service delivery platforms (paragraphs 0012-0013). An MVNE is a set of components that provides a service delivery architecture for a particular type of service. SDPs became popular with the introduction of open standards as IP technologies were introduced, and with the rapid expansion of Voice-over-IP (VoIP) for transmission of voice data over packet networks and the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for standardized media control, especially regarding enterprise voice communication (paragraph 0015). A method is provided for controlling access to applications or services over a network which includes a plurality of client mobile communications devices, and a network appliance equipped with a product catalog which contains a listing of a plurality of applications or services, and a set of service rules which governs access to any of the applications or services in the product catalog by the client devices. The method comprises receiving a request, from one of the plurality of client devices (paragraph 0036). The MNVE platform is a service delivery platform through which the MNVE interfaces with an MNO and a service aggregator. The MNVE platform interacts with modules or services which provide e-mail receipt, a payment gateway and a service for order fulfillment and returns (paragraph 0053). The order management processes for the fulfillment of multiple play service orders in the customer management module are processed by an embedded workflow engine. Each step of the order management activities is configured according to specific operational business processes and policies covering the initiation, modification and termination of services, the automatic provisioning of interfaces, and the fulfillment of orders to external devices and third parties. The order management features of the customer management module support the configuration, validation and assignment of complex services and bundle (paragraphs 0064-0065). The event and usage-based rating engine is preferably a carrier-grade rating engine that supports high volume processing of real-time and batch event and usage records. The event and usage-based rating engine handles traditional retail, business and inter-carrier rating scenarios, as well as multilayered rating hierarchies to support partner and vendor relationships. The event and usage-based rating engine gathers usage information from internal and external sources, validates and formats the information, identifies the subscribers to be billed and rates the usage according specific subscriber usage plans (paragraphs 0066-0068). With respect to volume discounts, the billing and invoicing engine is preferably adapted to aggregate customer usage according to several categories and to apply appropriate volume discounts. With respect to cross-product discounts, the billing and invoicing engine is preferably adapted to apply discounts based on diverse combinations of products and packages (paragraph 0072).
“Providing, by the real-time event streaming module to the aggregator module, the event data packets in real-time” as the MNVE platform has a front end and a back end within the infrastructure and a set of business support systems. The front end and a back end may be addressed through a client. Functionalities of MNVE platform handles SMS and real-time charging of SMS. Prior to granting an SMS submission the SMS Charger requests permission (e.g., validation) from Charging. Real-time charging is applicable to roaming- and home network users. SCP Handles call control and real-time charging of voice/data/fax/video calls. All traffic is monitored in real time with refusal of service if e.g., insufficient funds (paragraphs 0012-0013, 0083 and table 1). Network traffic may be allowed from a specific protocol or protocols, while network traffic from other protocols is denied. For example, HTTP/HTTPS traffic may be allowed, but video may be denied (e.g., validation) using RTSP (Real Time Streaming Protocol) and/or HTTP/HTTPS as the blocker. This approach may allow the service provider and its tenants more control over the content that is accessed and consumed by users (paragraph 0119).
Meyer does not explicitly teach the claimed limitation “aggregating, by the aggregator module, the event data packets according to their corresponding transactions to form a plurality of event data packet groups; and for each event data packet group in the plurality of event data packet groups: validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group, after validating the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group, storing the event data packets in the event data packets in the event data packet group in the events database, and processing, by the one or more aggregation processors, stored the event data in the event data packets in the event data packet group”.
Pantaliano teaches methods for capturing event feedback and providing a representation of feedback results generated using the feedback indicia. The representation of feedback results involves configuring a transmission module of the computing device to synchronize to an event record representing an event; receiving feedback indicia associated with an event at the computing device; operating a data processor of the computing device to assemble a feedback indicia array using the feedback indicia; and providing the event feedback to a remote data processing module. The capturing of event feedback involves storing a plurality of different event records for a plurality of different events; for each event record, receiving a plurality of feedback indicia arrays; and for each event record determining an aggregate feedback result array from the plurality of feedback indicia arrays (abstract, paragraphs 0019-0021). Aggregating the received feedback indicia using a correlation based on an event or feedback timestamp, analysis of the data for purposes of validation, including checks for counterfeit submissions or incorrectness, validating format of feedback indicia, generating feedback results, generating comparisons for specific observers analysis of the data for greater understanding of the observer intent including removing bias or statistical noise in the data (validation), and processing of the data so that it can be more easily or completely understood including but not limited to correlating it with the environmental indicia or other data and/or summarizing feedback results (paragraphs 0160-0161, 0163, 0165). An alert can be created by any warning, error, or other alarm message from an engine, generator, or other system as configured and/or a satisfied alert condition as configured in the databases, a notification is a message or indication, often by a user or user interface, of an alert, a group of alerts, or other alert related information (paragraph 0184).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Meyer and Pantaliano before him/her, to modify Meyer validating, by the event validator, the event data in event data packets in the event data packet group because that would provide a method capturing communicating event feedback synchronize to an event record stored on a remote computer-readable storage module, wherein the event of interest configured to link the event feedback to the event record as taught by Pantaliano (paragraph 0024).
As to Claim 2, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein processing the event data packets in the event data packet group comprises creating one or more journal entries using the event data in the event data packets” as (paragraphs 0015-0016, 0045, 0048, 0054, 0065, 0074, 0076, 0083, 0112, 01250127; see also table 1).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraph 0011, 0014-0015, 0021-0024, 0040-0044).
As to Claim 3, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the event data packets each comprise an event identifier” as (paragraphs 0083, 0100-0101, 01270112, 01250127; see also table 1).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraph 0011, 0013, 0023, 0029-0031, 0051, 0053).
As to Claim 4, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the event data packet groups are aggregated according to delivery identifiers” as (paragraphs 0053, 0066, 0100-0104).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0011, 0013, 0023, 0029-0030).
As to Claim 5, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein validating the event data comprises determining that the event data in the event data packets are consistent” as (paragraphs 0036, 0037,0057, 0101, claim 1).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0014, 0038, 0054, 0089).
As to Claim 6, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the aggregator module comprises one or more filters for filtering the event data packets” as (paragraphs 0077, 0112, 0125).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0011, 0014, 0051, 0054).
As to Claim 7, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the one or more filters comprise a personal identifiable information (PII) filter” as (paragraphs0100-0101, 0130).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraph 0011, 0014, 0051, 0054, 0072, 0229).
As to Claim 8, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the one or more filters comprise a delivery event filter” as (paragraphs 0077, 0112, 0125).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0011, 0014, 0051, 0054).
As to Claim 9, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the plurality of user devices includes end user devices and transporter user devices, the transporter user devices used by transporters that operate transporter vehicles” as (paragraphs 0015, 0048, 0086).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0010-0011, 0021, 0024,0029-0030).
As to Claim 10, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the transactions are delivery transactions” as (paragraphs 0015, 0053, 0056, 0083, 0100, table 1).
As to claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a), the limitations therein have substantially the same scope as claim 1. In addition, Meyer teaches a communications system is provided which comprises a first platform associated with an MVNE; a second platform which is integrated with said first platform and which has a plurality of tenants associated therewith, wherein each tenant has a set of mobile communications devices associated with it (paragraph 0028). Therefore, this claim is rejected for at least the same reasons as claim 1.
As to Claim 12, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the real-time event streaming module is a first real-time event streaming module, and wherein the non-transitory computer readable medium further comprises a second real-time event streaming module, which preprocesses the event data packets after receiving the plurality of event data packets from the first real-time event streaming module” as (paragraphs 0058, 0061, 0066, 0083, 0115, 0119, and table 1)
Pantaliano teaches (paragraphs 0010, 0021, 0049, 0063,0156, 0324).
As to Claim 13, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the aggregator module comprises one or more filters for filtering the event data packets before the plurality of event data packets are received by the second real-time event streaming module” as (paragraphs 0077, 0112, 0125).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0011, 0014, 0051, 0054).
As to Claim 14, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the event data packet groups are aggregated according to event identifiers” as (paragraphs 0083, 0100-0101, 01270112, 01250127; see also table 1).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraph 0011, 0013, 0023, 0029-0031, 0051, 0053).
As to Claim 15, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the events database is a persistent memory data storage” as (paragraphs 0032, 0097-0098).
Pantaliano teaches (paragraphs 0126-0127, 0139, 0147, 0157,0193).
As to Claim 16, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the aggregator module aggregates the event data packets while they are stored in a temporary memory storage” as (paragraphs 0032, 0097-0098).
Pantaliano teaches (paragraphs 0126-0127, 0139, 0147, 0157,0193).
As to Claim 17, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the plurality of user devices includes end user devices and transporter user devices, the transporter user devices used by transporters that operate transporter vehicles” as (paragraphs 0015, 0048, 0086).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0010-0011, 0021, 0024,0029-0030).
As to claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103(a), the limitations therein have substantially the same scope as claim 1. In addition, Meyer teaches a communications system is provided which comprises a first platform associated with an MVNE; a second platform which is integrated with said first platform and which has a plurality of tenants associated therewith, wherein each tenant has a set of mobile communications devices associated with it (paragraph 0028). Therefore, this claim is rejected for at least the same reasons as claim 1
As to Claim 19, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“The plurality of user devices, wherein the plurality of user devices includes transporter end user devices” as (paragraphs 0015, 0048, 0086).
Pantaliano teaches (abstract, paragraphs 0010-0011, 0021, 0024,0029-0030).
As to Claim 20, Meyer teaches the claimed limitations:
“Wherein the logistics platform is configured to coordinate transporters as the transporters deliver items to end users” as (paragraphs 0048, 0083, 0109, table 1)
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraph 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.
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. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121(b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131(b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as “Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced” may be deemed insufficient.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Hwa whose telephone number is 571-270-1285 or email address james.hwa@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 am – 5:30 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ajay Bhatia can be reached on 571-272-3906. 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 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.
03/05/2026
/SHYUE JIUNN HWA/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156