DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to application 19/098,037 filed 4/2/2025. Claims 1, 13, and 20 were amended in the reply filed 8/3/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending. This action is final.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Applicant’s argument starting on page 8 regarding claims 1-20: Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the rejections made under 35 USC § 101 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive.
Applicant first argues that the amended claims are analogous to other inventions found to be patent eligible subject matter such as Enfish and PTAB decision for Application 16/319,040. Examiner respectfully disagrees that the instant claims are analogous to the patent eligible subject matter of these cases. Specifically, Examiner finds that the claimed artificial intelligence technology is merely a recitation of generic machine learning techniques. "[P]atents that do no more than claim the application of generic machine learning to new data environments, without disclosing improvements to the machine learning models to be applied, are patent ineligible under § 101." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025) (slip op. at 18). "Finally, the claimed methods are not rendered patent eligible by the fact that (using existing machine learning technology) they perform a task previously undertaken by humans with greater speed and efficiency than could previously be achieved." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025), slip op. at 15. "[T]he only thing the claims disclose about the use of machine learning is that machine learning is used in a new environment." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025), slip op. at 13. "The requirements that the machine learning model be 'iteratively trained' or dynamically adjusted in the Machine Learning Training patents do not represent a technological improvement." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025), slip op. at 12.
Regarding Applicant’s argument starting on page 11 regarding claims 1-6, 10-13, 15-17, and 20: Applicant’s arguments filed with respect to the rejections made under 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered, but are moot. Claims 1-6, 9-13, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423). Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423) in view of Elf (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0086102). Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423) in view of Li (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0047541). Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423) in view of Hu (U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0202721).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a logic/algorithmic/AI module in claims 1, 3, and 20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Step 1: Claims 1, 13, and 20 each recite a method, a system, and a non-transitory computer readable medium, respectively, for receiving a request at a platform, the request initiated at a client in data communication with the platform; parsing the request to perform a query of a database in data communication with the platform; invoking a logic/algorithmic/AI module configured to dynamically adjust one or more attributes, the logic/algorithmic/AI module being configured to be trained on output data of the platform, the logic/algorithmic/AI module configured to generate an adjusted attribute; generating an augmented request with responsive data retrieved from the database in response to the query, the augmented request including the adjusted attribute; inserting a reservation identifier into the augmented request, the augmented request including the reservation identifier, a first platform-generated attribute, and a second platform- generated attribute, any of which is the adjusted attribute; associating the augmented request including the adjusted attribute to a marketplace in which to bid or select a subset of data; transmitting the augmented request to another client; and using the augmented request, the first platform generated attribute, and the second platform generated attribute to update the another client. Therefore, claims 1, 13, and 20 are each directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention: a method, a machine, and an article of manufacture, respectively.
Step 2A – Prong One: The limitations receiving a request ... the request initiated at a client in data communication ... parsing the request to perform a query ... in data communication ... invoking ... to dynamically adjust one or more attributes ... to be trained on output data of the platform ... to generate an adjusted attribute; generating an augmented request with responsive data retrieved ... in response to the query, the augmented request including the adjusted attribute; inserting a reservation identifier into the augmented request, the augmented request including the reservation identifier, a first ... attribute, and a second ... attribute, any of which is the adjusted attribute; associating the augmented request including the adjusted attribute to a marketplace in which to bid or select a subset of data; transmitting the augmented request to another client; and using the augmented request, the first ... attribute, and the second ... attribute to update the another client, as drafted, is a method that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, only covers concepts of “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” (e.g., commercial interactions – business relations). That is, nothing in the claim elements disclose anything outside the groupings of “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” (e.g., commercial interactions – business relations). Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claims 1, 13, and 20 merely describe how to generally “apply” the concept of the aforementioned abstract idea using generic computer components. The additional elements of claims 1, 13, and 20, a platform (claims 1, 13, and 20), a database (claims 1, 13, and 20), a logic/algorithmic/AI module (claims 1, 13, and 20), platform-generated (claims 1, 13, and 20), a system (claim 13), a processor (claim 13), and a non-transitory computer readable medium (claim 20), are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as generic computer tools to perform the aforementioned abstract idea. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computerized system is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Accordingly, alone and in combination, the additional elements of claims 1, 13, and 20 do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the claims as a whole merely describe the abstract idea generally “applied” to a generic computer environment. The additional elements of claims 1, 13, and 20, a platform, a database, a logic/algorithmic/AI module, platform-generated, a system, a processor, and a non-transitory computer readable medium, are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as generic computer components upon which the abstract idea is “applied.” The high level of generality in which this additional element is described indicates that the additional element is sufficiently known such that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of the additional element to satisfy the statutory disclosure requirements. (Examiner’s Note: Reciting generic AI methods at a high level has been determined by the courts to be patent ineligible subject matter under 35 USC § 101. "[P]atents that do no more than claim the application of generic machine learning to new data environments, without disclosing improvements to the machine learning models to be applied, are patent ineligible under § 101." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025) (slip op. at 18). "Finally, the claimed methods are not rendered patent eligible by the fact that (using existing machine learning technology) they perform a task previously undertaken by humans with greater speed and efficiency than could previously be achieved." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025), slip op. at 15. "[T]he only thing the claims disclose about the use of machine learning is that machine learning is used in a new environment." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025), slip op. at 13. "The requirements that the machine learning model be 'iteratively trained' or dynamically adjusted in the Machine Learning Training patents do not represent a technological improvement." Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox. Corp., Fed Cir. No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025), slip op. at 12.) Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims add significantly more to the abstract idea. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
Claims 2-12 and 14-19 have been given the full two-part analysis including analyzing the limitations both individually and in combination. Claims 2-12 and 14-19 when analyzed individually, and in combination, are also held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. The recited limitations of the dependent claims fail to establish that the claims do not recite an abstract idea because the recited limitations of the dependent claims merely further narrow the abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two: The limitations of the dependent claims fail to integrate an abstract idea into a practical application because the claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” a method of the aforementioned abstract idea. Although claim 12 recites the additional element electronically, claim 14 recites the additional element a reservation proxy server process, and claim 19 recites the additional element a non-fungible token and a blockchain, the claims as a whole merely describe how to generally “apply” the aforementioned abstract idea in a generic computer environment. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims integrates the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B: Performing the further narrowed abstract ideas of the dependent claims on the additional elements of the independent claim, individually or in combination, does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas and amount to merely using a computer, in its ordinary capacity, as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Similarly, the recited limitations of the dependent claims fail to establish that the claims provide an inventive concept because claims that merely use a computer, in its ordinary capacity, as a tool to perform the abstract idea cannot provide an inventive concept. Although claim 12 recites the additional element electronically, claim 14 recites the additional element a reservation proxy server process, and claim 19 recites the additional element a non-fungible token, and a blockchain, they are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as generic computer components upon which the abstract idea is “applied.” The high level of generality in which the additional elements are described indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently known such that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of the additional elements to satisfy the statutory disclosure requirements. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims add significantly more to the abstract idea. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 9-13, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423).
Regarding claims 1, 13, and 20, Ohmori discloses the following limitations:
receiving a request at a platform, the request initiated at a client in data communication with the platform; [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to request a change to their reservation (i.e., receiving a request at a platform, the request initiated at a client in data communication with the platform) based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to.]
parsing the request to perform a query of a database in data communication with the platform; [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to input a request to change their reservation based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation (i.e., parsing the request to perform a query of a database in data communication with the platform). Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to.]
... dynamically adjust one or more attributes ... generating an augmented request with responsive data retrieved from the database in response to the query, the augmented request including the adjusted attribute; [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to input a request to change their reservation based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation (i.e., parsing the request to perform a query of a database in data communication with the platform). Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to (i.e., generating an augmented request with responsive data retrieved from the database in response to the query, the augmented request including the adjusted attribute).]
inserting a reservation identifier into the augmented request, the augmented request including the reservation identifier, a first platform-generated attribute, and a second platform- generated attribute, any of which is the adjusted attribute; [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to input a request to change their reservation based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to. Ohmori [0239]; (Fig. 5); further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation (i.e., inserting a reservation identifier into the augmented request). Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information (i.e., the augmented request) comprises a reservation number (i.e., a reservation identifier), a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number (i.e., a first platform-generated attribute, and a second platform- generated attribute), and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation (i.e., a first platform-generated attribute) as well as a ticket status (i.e., a second platform-generated attribute, any of which is the adjusted attribute).]
associating the augmented request including the adjusted attribute to a marketplace in which to bid or select a subset of data; [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system (i.e., a marketplace in which to bid or select a subset of data) for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to input a request to change their reservation based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to. Ohmori [0239]; (Fig. 5); further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information (i.e., the augmented request) comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user (i.e., associating the augmented request including the adjusted attribute to a marketplace in which to bid or select a subset of data). Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation.]
transmitting the augmented request to another client; [See [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation. Ohmori [0153]; (Fig. 8); (Fig. 1, element 300); (Fig. 7, element 331); [0197]; further teaches updating the train reservation table 331 of the reservation center apparatus 300 with the changed reservation information (i.e., transmitting the augmented request to another client). Ohmori [0460-0464] further teaches that the reservation center apparatus 300 may be operated by a transportation service provider, or other types of organizations such as event organizers or sellers of fresh food (i.e., another client).]
and using the augmented request, the first platform generated attribute, and the second platform generated attribute to update the another client. [See [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation. Ohmori [0153]; (Fig. 8); (Fig. 1, element 300); (Fig. 7, element 331); [0197]; (Figs. 28, 29); further teaches updating the train reservation table 331 of the reservation center apparatus 300 with the changed reservation information (i.e., and using the augmented request, the first platform generated attribute, and the second platform generated attribute to update the another client).]
Although Ohmori teaches dynamically adjusting one or more attributes, Ohmori does not teach a trained AI module to generate and dynamically adjust the one or more attributes. Therefore, Ohmori does not, however Ngo does, disclose the following limitations:
invoking a logic/algorithmic/AI module configured to dynamically adjust one or more attributes, the logic/algorithmic/AI module being configured to be trained on output data of the platform, the logic/algorithmic/AI module configured to generate an adjusted attribute; [See [0026]; [0073] Ngo teaches a machine learning model being trained (i.e., the logic/algorithmic/AI module being configured to be trained on output data of the platform) to output a recommended seat for a user where the recommendation is based on a combination of personal user preferences and attributes of a location at the venue where the event is taking place (i.e., a logic/algorithmic/AI module configured to dynamically adjust one or more attributes ... the logic/algorithmic/AI module configured to generate an adjusted attribute). For example, inputs regarding user preferences may include manually provided user preferences such as likes and dislikes (e.g., a fan of one team, do not like attending weeknight events), as well as price ranges, section preferences, interest areas, etc. In an additional or alternative embodiment, inputs may be automatically determined without user input, such as data related to historical user purchases, online and submitted reviews, data obtained from scrubbing e-mails, blogs, social media posts, etc.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the ticket update system of Ohmori with the ticket update system of Ng. By making this combination, the system of Ohmori would be able to utilize machine learning techniques to automatically update a user’s ticket to better fit the user’s preferences or to improve their experience at the ticketed event.
Regarding claim 2, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
receiving another request initiated by the client, the another request being configured to modify one or more attributes of the request. [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to input a request to change their reservation based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to (i.e., request initiated by the client). Ohmori (Fig. 28, elements S254, S255, S256, S257); [0433]; further teaches that if the train selected by the user is unavailable, an updated list of available trains is presented to the user and they must choose another train (i.e., receiving another request initiated by the client, the another request being configured to modify one or more attributes of the request).]
Regarding claim 3, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
further comprising generating an updated augmented request configured to modify one or more attributes of the request [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to input a request to change their reservation based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to (i.e., a request initiated by the client). Ohmori (Fig. 28, elements S254, S255, S256, S257); [0433]; further teaches that if the train selected by the user is unavailable, an updated list of available trains is presented to the user and they must choose another train. After selecting an available train from the updated list of available trains (i.e., generating an updated augmented request), the reservation may be changed as described above and in Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264]. Changing the reservation involves changing reservation information (i.e., modify one or more attributes of the request), which is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number (see Ohmori [0107]).]
and the data associated with the request being stored on the database and transmitted to the platform and the another client in substantially real-time. [See [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation. Ohmori [0153]; (Fig. 8); (Fig. 1, element 300); (Fig. 7, element 331); [0197]; (Figs. 28, 29); further teaches that when the user changes their reservation information, the train reservation table 331 (i.e., the database) of the reservation center apparatus 300 (i.e., the platform and the another client) is automatically updated with the changed reservation information and updated availability status.]
Regarding claim 4, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the request is associated with an electronic reservation. [See [0010] Ohmori teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request (i.e., wherein the request is associated with an electronic reservation).]
Regarding claim 5, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the request is associated with cancelling an electronic reservation. [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation” (i.e., wherein the request is associated with cancelling an electronic reservation). Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.”]
Regarding claim 6, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the parsing the request to perform the query of the database includes retrieving one or more rules to be applied to the request. [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation”. Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.” Alternatively, Ohmori [0239] teaches that when the reservation is changed and not cancelled, the deleted reservation user information is replaced with new reservation user information. In other words, depending on the information associated with the request (e.g., reservation change or reservation cancellation), different data handling rules are followed by the system (i.e., wherein the parsing the request to perform the query of the database includes retrieving one or more rules to be applied to the request).]
Regarding claim 9, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Although Ohmori teaches selling goods and services on a platform, Ohmori does not teach that its platform is an open marketplace. Therefore, Ohmori does not, however Ngo does, disclose the following limitations:
wherein the another client is an open marketplace. [See [0037] Ngo teaches selling tickets via an online marketplace (i.e., wherein the another client is an open marketplace).]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the closed market of Ohmori with the open market of Ngo. By making this combination, the platform described in Ohmori would be able to earn more money that comes with hosting an open marketplace. (See NPL attached)
Regarding claim 10, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the another client is a closed marketplace. [See [0061]; (Fig. 1, elements 20, 100, 300); Ohmori teaches the reservation center apparatus 300 operated by an organization (i.e., the another client). Ohmori [0460-0464] further teaches that the reservation center apparatus 300 may be operated by a transportation service provider, or other types of organizations such as event organizers or sellers of fresh food for selling their goods and services to users (i.e., wherein the another client is a closed marketplace).]
Regarding claim 11, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the another client is the platform [See [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation. Ohmori [0153]; (Fig. 8); (Fig. 1, element 300); (Fig. 7, element 331); [0197]; further teaches updating the train reservation table 331 of the reservation center apparatus 300 with the changed reservation information (i.e., wherein the another client is the platform). Ohmori [0460-0464] further teaches that the reservation center apparatus 300 may be operated by a transportation service provider, or other types of organizations such as event organizers or sellers of fresh food (i.e., wherein the another client is the platform).]
the platform being configured to transmit the augmented request to at least the another client with the first platform generated attribute and the second platform generated attribute. [See [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user (i.e., the first platform generated attribute and the second platform generated attribute). Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation. Ohmori [0153]; (Fig. 8); (Fig. 1, element 300); (Fig. 7, element 331); [0197]; (Figs. 28, 29); further teaches updating the train reservation table 331 of the reservation center apparatus 300 with the changed reservation information (i.e., the platform being configured to transmit the augmented request to at least the another client with the first platform generated attribute and the second platform generated attribute).]
Regarding claim 12, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the augmented request comprises a ticket [See [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train ticket reservation (i.e., wherein the augmented request comprises a ticket). Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user.]
the ticket being configured to be submitted to a marketplace electronically instantiated by the platform and configured to be electronically accessible by the another client. [See [0061]; (Fig. 1, elements 20, 100, 300); Ohmori teaches the reservation center apparatus 300 offering tickets for sale over the internet (i.e., the ticket being configured to be submitted to a marketplace electronically instantiated by the platform). Ohmori [0460-0464] further teaches that the reservation center apparatus 300 may be operated by a transportation service provider, or other types of organizations such as event organizers or sellers of fresh food (i.e., configured to be electronically accessible by the another client).]
Regarding claim 15, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 13 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the augmented request is a ticket generated using one or more rules retrieved in response to the query of the database. [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation”. Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 7, 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the reservation center apparatus 300 (i.e., platform) updates associated data. The user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.” Alternatively, Ohmori [0239] teaches that when the reservation is changed and not cancelled, the deleted reservation user information is replaced with new reservation user information. In other words, depending on the information associated with the request (e.g., reservation change or reservation cancellation), different data handling rules are followed by the system (i.e., wherein the augmented request is a ticket generated using one or more rules retrieved in response to the query of the database).]
Regarding claim 16, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 13 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the augmented request is a ticket generated using one or more rules retrieved in response to the query of the database [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation”. Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 7, 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the reservation center apparatus 300 (i.e., platform) updates associated data. The user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.” Alternatively, Ohmori [0239] teaches that when the reservation is changed and not cancelled, the deleted reservation user information is replaced with new reservation user information. In other words, depending on the information associated with the request (e.g., reservation change or reservation cancellation), different data handling rules are followed by the reservation center apparatus 300 (i.e., wherein the augmented request is a ticket generated using one or more rules retrieved in response to the query of the database).]
the one or more rules including at least one business rule being applied to the request by the platform to generate the augmented request [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation”. Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 7, 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the reservation center apparatus 300 (i.e., platform) updates associated data. The user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.” Alternatively, Ohmori [0239] teaches that when the reservation is changed and not cancelled, the deleted reservation user information is replaced with new reservation user information. In other words, depending on the information associated with the request (e.g., reservation change or reservation cancellation), different data handling rules are followed by the reservation center apparatus 300 (i.e., the one or more rules including at least one business rule being applied to the request by the platform to generate the augmented request).]
Regarding claim 17, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 13 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the first platform generated attribute comprises a first value associated with a ticket generated when the augmented request is generated [See (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] Ohmori teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train (and associated train number) (i.e., the first platform generated attribute) from the train list screen to change their reservation to (i.e., wherein the first platform generated attribute comprises a first value associated with a ticket generated when the augmented request is generated). [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number, and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation. Ohmori [0153]; (Fig. 8); (Fig. 1, element 300); (Fig. 7, element 331); [0197]; further teaches updating the train reservation table 331 of the reservation center apparatus 300 with the changed reservation information.]
and the second platform generated attribute comprises a second value associated with an invitation to accept the augmented request. [See (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] Ohmori teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train (and associated train number) from the train list screen to change their reservation to. [0239]; (Fig. 5); Ohmori further teaches, after the user selects a new train, attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation (i.e., the second platform generated attribute comprises a second value associated with an invitation to accept the augmented request). Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number (i.e., second platform generated attributes), and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation. Ohmori [0153]; (Fig. 8); (Fig. 1, element 300); (Fig. 7, element 331); [0197]; further teaches updating the train reservation table 331 of the reservation center apparatus 300 with the changed reservation information.]
Regarding claim 18, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 13 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein the first platform generated attribute is ... associated with the augmented request, the augmented request being a ticket generated from a cancellation of a reservation based on the data from the client, the data being associated with the request. [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation” (i.e., a cancellation of a reservation based on the data from the client, the data being associated with the request). Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation, the user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.” Ohmori [0010] further teaches a reservation changing system for changing a reservation for purchasing a ticket for transport that provides a transportation service, the reservation changing system including a mobile terminal apparatus, an information provision server apparatus, and a reservation server apparatus. Ohmori [0079]; [0087]; (Fig. 3, element 121b) further teaches a user navigating a user interface to select a reservation option and generate a reservation request. Ohmori [0107] further teaches that the reservation information is composed of a reservation number, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number. Ohmori (Fig. 3, element 121c); (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0263-0264] further teaches prompting a user to input a request to change their reservation based on a cancellation or delay of a previously reserved train. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); [0261] further teaches displaying a list of trains that may be used by the user if they wish to change their reservation. Ohmori (Fig. 13, elements 432, 433); (Fig. 14, elements 435, 436); [0261-0262] further teaches that if the user wishes to change their reservation, they may select an alternative train from the train list screen to change their reservation to. Ohmori [0239]; (Fig. 5); further teaches attaching a reservation number to the new reservation user information associated with the changed train reservation. Ohmori [0161]; (Fig. 5); further teaches that the new reservation user information comprises a reservation number, a user ID, a reservation date, a travel date, a train number, a boarding station, a destination station, a departure time, an arrival time, and a seat number (i.e., wherein the first platform generated attribute is ... associated with the augmented request, the augmented request being a ticket from a cancellation of a reservation based on the data from the client, the data being associated with the request), and corresponds to one reservation by a user. Ohmori (Fig. 5); [0193]; [0118-0119] further teaches that a digital signature is also attached to new reservation as well as a ticket status.]
Although Ohmori teaches storing ticket attribute data, Ohmori does not, however Ngo does, disclose the following limitations:
... attribute is a price associated with the augmented request ... [See [0064] Ngo teaches storing ticket data which includes ticket details, such as price, quantity, location, and event information (i.e., ... attribute is a price associated with the augmented request ...).]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the stored ticket data of Ohmori with the stored ticket data of Ngo. By making this combination, the ticket fare described in Ohmori would always be appropriately associated with the rest of the ticket details. This would ensure that it is always clear how much a ticket will cost to purchase.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423) in view of Elf (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0086102).
Regarding claim 7, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein parsing the request to perform the query of the database includes applying one or more rules retrieved ... the one or more rules being applied during generation of the augmented request. [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation”. Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.” Alternatively, Ohmori [0239] teaches that when the reservation is changed and not cancelled, the deleted reservation user information is replaced with new reservation user information. In other words, depending on the information associated with the request (e.g., reservation change or reservation cancellation), different data handling rules are followed by the system (wherein parsing the request to perform the query of the database includes applying one or more rules retrieved ... the one or more rules being applied during generation of the augmented request).]
Although Ohmori in view of Ngo teaches handling reservation data based on different data handling rules of the system, Ohmori in view of Ngo does not, however Elf does, disclose the following limitations:
... one or more rules retrieved from the database ... [See [0032] Elf teaches storing and retrieving business rules from a business rules database of a travel merchant (i.e., ... one or more rules retrieved from the database ...).]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the rules data of Ohmori in view of Ngo with the rules database of Elf. By making this combination, Ohmori in view of Ngo would be able to have a centralized data storage location for maintaining rules associated with the sale and modification of tickets and/or other services.
Regarding claim 8, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 1 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
wherein parsing the request to perform the query of the database includes applying one or more rules ... the one or more rules being applied during generation of the augmented request before transmitting the augmented request. [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation”. Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.” Alternatively, Ohmori [0239] teaches that when the reservation is changed and not cancelled, the deleted reservation user information is replaced with new reservation user information. In other words, depending on the information associated with the request (e.g., reservation change or reservation cancellation), different data handling rules are followed by the system (wherein parsing the request to perform the query of the database includes applying one or more rules ... the one or more rules being applied during generation of the augmented request before transmitting the augmented request). In other words, when the user selects either “Change Reservation” or “Cancel Reservation,” the appropriate rule is associated with the request and the request is sent to by processed by the reservation center apparatus 300 (i.e., platform).]
Although Ohmori in view of Ngo teaches handling reservation data based on different data handling rules of the system, Ohmori in view of Ngo does not, however Elf does, disclose the following limitations:
... one or more rules retrieved from the database ... [See [0032] Elf teaches storing and retrieving business rules from a business rules database of a travel merchant (i.e., ... one or more rules retrieved from the database ...).]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the rules data of Ohmori in view of Ngo with the rules database of Elf. By making this combination, Ohmori in view of Ngo would be able to have a centralized data storage location for maintaining rules associated with the sale and modification of tickets and/or other services.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423) in view of Li (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0047541).
Regarding claim 14, Ohmori in view of Ngo discloses all claim 13 limitations. Ohmori further discloses the following limitations:
further comprising a reservation ... process configured to identify a cancellation request associated with the request when the request is parsed. [See (Fig. 3, element 121d); Ohmori teaches that the user is presented with a menu with the options “Available Seat Search,” “Reserve Train,” “Change Reservation,” and “Cancel Reservation” (i.e., further comprising a reservation ... process configured to identify a cancellation request associated with the request when the request is parsed). Ohmori [0197]; (Figs. 8, 9) further shows that when a reservation is no longer belonging to a user, by way of a change in reservation or cancellation (i.e., augmented request), the user information in the reservation user table 332 associated with the original reservation is deleted, and the train reservation table 331 is updated to reflect that the ticket is now “available.”]
Although Ohmori in view of Ngo teaches identifying cancellation requests, Ohmori in view of Ngo does not, however Li does, disclose the following limitations:
... a reservation proxy server process ... [See [0015]; [0017]; [0022] (Fig. 1); (Fig. 3) Li teaches using a proxy server in its ticket reservation process.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the ticket reservation system of Ohmori with the ticket reservation system of Li. By making this combination, Ohmori would be able to use an intermediary proxy server in order to verify the identity of a user who is trying to purchase a ticket (see Li [0016]; [0026]) as well as performing ticket booking according to user settings established in a user account (see Li [0027-0028]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohmori (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0277078) in view of Ngo (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0158423) in view of Hu (U.S. Pub. No. 2024/0202721).
Regarding claim 19, Ohmori discloses all claim 13 limitations. Although Ohmori teaches selling goods and services on a platform, Ohmori does not teach using NFT or blockchain technology in its system. Therefore, Ohmori does not, however Hu does, disclose the following limitations:
wherein the augmented request is a non-fungible token generated using a blockchain. (Examiner’s Note: Spec. para. [0048-0049] describes the non-fungible token being representative of a “ResID” which is representative of a ticket. Therefore, in this instance the “augmented request” is interpreted as referring to the ticket itself, not the request to modify the ticket.) [See [0127]; [0134]; [0137-0138] Hu teaches selling tickets on a secondary market via a platform. Hu further teaches that the tickets themselves are NFTs stored on a blockchain (i.e., wherein the augmented request is a non-fungible token generated using a blockchain).]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the ticket market of Ohmori with the NFT ticket market of Hu. By making this combination, the system of Ohmori would be able to have more control over the resale of tickets on a secondary market by being able to control how revenue from the resale of tickets is distributed (see Hu [0137]).
Prior Art
The following prior art is relevant to the invention but was not used in prior art rejections:
Angrish (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0178712) – Mobile payments integrated with a booking system
McCullough (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0246247) – Restaurant inventory management
Niessen (U.S. Pub. No. 2008/0154654) – Restaurant yield management portal
Huang (U.S. Pub. No. 20130325523) – Authentication system of electronic tickets and the authentication method for the same
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRIS GOMEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0926. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7-4 CDT.
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, Shannon Campbell can be reached at 5712725587. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHRISTOPHER GOMEZ/
Examiner, Art Unit 3628
