CTNF 19/098,418 CTNF 94566 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims The following is Office Action on the merits in response to the communication received on 4/2/25 . Claim status: Amended claims: none Canceled claims: none Added New claims: None Pending claims: 1-20 Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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 because the claimed invention is not directed to statutory subject matter. Specifically, the invention of claims 1-20 is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Independent claims 1, 9 and 17 are directed to a device (claim 1), a method (claim 9) and a non-transitory computer readable medium (claim 17). Therefore on its face, each of claims 1, 9 and 17 is directed to a statutory category of invention under Step 1 of the 2019 PEG. However claims 1, 9 and 17 are also directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, under Step 2A (Prong One and Prong Two) and Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, which is a judicial exception to 35 U.S.C. 101, as detailed below. Using the language of independent claim 1 to illustrate the claim recites the limitations of, (i) receive information regarding outstanding loans for a borrower; (ii) generate a graphical user interface including: a consolidation portion which provides a consolidation listing of the outstanding loans for inclusion in a consolidation group; an exclusion portion which provides an exclusion listing of any of the outstanding loans that are excluded from the consolidation group; and one or more control elements associated with the outstanding loans, the one or more control elements allowing for inclusion of the outstanding loans in the consolidation group; (iii) perform a benefits analysis for the consolidation group; (iv) display, based on the benefits analysis, consolidated loan information including at least one of a revised interest rate, a revised final total monthly payment amount, and a revised final total cost of a consolidated loan; and (v) update the exclusion listing to include any of the outstanding loans determined to result in lost benefits based on the benefits analysis under the broadest reasonable interpretation cover methods of organizing human activity, commercial or legal interactions but for the recitation of generic computers. (Independent claims 9 and 17 recite similar limitations and the analysis is the same). That is, other than reciting an electronic computing device, at least one processor and system memory, nothing in the claim precludes the steps from being directed to methods of organizing human activity -- commercial or legal interactions. If a claim limitation under its BRI, covers methods of organizing human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components, then the limitations fall within the “methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Therefore, claim 1 recites an abstract idea under Step 2A Prong One of the Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance 84 Fed.Reg 50 (“2019 PEG”). This “methods of organizing human activity” is not integrated into a practical application under Step 2A prong Two of the 2019 PEG. In particular claim 1 recites the following additional elements of, an electronic computing device, at least one processor and system memory. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the additional elements – an electronic computing device, at least one processor and system memory. The electronic computing device, at least one processor and system memory are recited at a high-level or generality ( i.e. as a generic computer performing generic computer functions) such that, they amount to no more than instructions to apply the abstract idea with a general computer (see MPEP 2106.05(h). Accordingly these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea. Under Step 2B of the 2019 PEG independent claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim(s) do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of using an electronic computing device, at least one processor and system memory, receive information regarding outstanding loans for a borrower; generate a graphical user interface including: a consolidation portion which provides a consolidation listing of the outstanding loans for inclusion in a consolidation group; an exclusion portion which provides an exclusion listing of any of the outstanding loans that are excluded from the consolidation group; and one or more control elements associated with the outstanding loans, the one or more control elements allowing for inclusion of the outstanding loans in the consolidation group; perform a benefits analysis for the consolidation group; display, based on the benefits analysis, consolidated loan information including at least one of a revised interest rate, a revised final total monthly payment amount, and a revised final total cost of a consolidated loan; and update the exclusion listing to include any of the outstanding loans determined to result in lost benefits based on the benefits analysis, amount to no more than instructions to apply the abstract idea with a general computer. The claims are not patent eligible. The dependent claims have been given the full two part analysis including analyzing the additional limitations individually. The Dependent claim(s) when analyzed individually are also held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because for the same reasoning as above and the additional recited limitation(s) fail to establish that the claim(s) are not directed to an abstract idea. The additional limitations of the dependent claim(s) when considered individually do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Claims 2-8, 10-15 and 18-20 merely further explain the abstract idea. When viewed individually the additional limitations do not amount to a claim as a whole that is significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly claims 1-20 are ineligible. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-34 AIA Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,373,236 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim patentably indistinct inventions and the claimed invention and the patent were commonly owned . Claim 1 of the Examined Application And Claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,373,236 The two independent claims are substantially similar to one another. Both are directed to an electronic computing device that includes at least one processor; and system memory, the system memory including instructions which, when executed by the processor cause the electronic computing device to: receive information regarding outstanding loans for a user, generate an interface including: a consolidation portion which provides a consolidation listing of the outstanding loans for inclusion in a consolidation group, an exclusion portion which provides an exclusion listing of any of the outstanding loans that are excluded from the consolidation group, a control element associated with the outstanding loan, the control element allowing for inclusion of the outstanding loan in the consolidation group, perform a benefits analysis for the consolidation group, display consolidated loan information including at least one of a revised interest rate, a revised final total monthly payment amount, and a revised final total cost of a consolidated loan and determine whether any benefits for any of the outstanding loans would be lost. However, the 236 Patent has additional limitations and is a species of the present application. Thus, under an anticipation analysis in MPEP 804(II)(B)(2), the differences between claim 13 of the 236 Patent and claim 1 herein would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan at the time of the invention . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 4-5, 8-9, 12-13, 16-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hildreth (U.S. Pub. No. 7,542,921), in view of Voth (U.S. Pub. No. 7,702,580) and Conyack (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0246060) . With respect to claims 1, 9 and 17: Hildreth teaches: An electronic computing device, comprising: at least one processor; and system memory, the system memory including instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic computing device to: receive information regarding outstanding loans for a borrower (“The overall operation of system 10 is explained with reference to the flow chart shown in FIG. 3. Upon establishing communication with an information processor 12, the user is prompted to input user data (step S100). Input can take the form of radio buttons, selections from pull-down menus or alpha-numeric entries into forms, such as HTML forms, provided on the display of user terminal 14. Data input can be at least partially performed automatically by querying a data bank or other suitable interface which can provide at least some of the required input (i.e. credit information from credit reporting agencies or information from a past visit to the site). If the data is entered by referring to an outside source, it is preferably that the user be given the opportunity to check the input for accuracy and to make the appropriate corrections. User data includes identification of the user's primary financing objective as well as a complete credit profile. The user's credit profile preferably includes one or more of credit card data, vehicle (automobile) loan data, secured and unsecured debt data, home equity data, and residential mortgage data” ( Hildreth Column 6 Lines 5-23). perform a benefits analysis for the consolidation group (“Selecting submit button 70 indicates to information processor 12 that the user is satisfied with their input data and wishes to continue. Upon receiving this indication, information processor 12 processes the input data using a comprehensive set of decision rules (step S104) to determine a recommended set of one or more products which will meet the user's objective as indicated in objective indicator area 24” ( Hildreth Column 8 Lines 1-7) and “Referring again to FIG. 8, in the case where the user does not wish to receive product details in step S114, the user can select an appropriate link on level one output display screen 72 to receive a level two output. Requesting a level two display causes information processor 12 to generate and display debt consolidation options on user terminal 14 (step S118). However, the system is preferably arranged such that the level two display is made available only if balance consolidation will further enable the user to meet their financing objective, for example, provide additional savings when compared with the individual product comparisons shown in the level one display” ( Hildreth Column 11 Lines 21-31) and “For example, level two output display screen 94 as shown in FIG. 12 comprises consolidation areas 96 a and 96 b . The consolidation option shown in consolidation area 96 a will potentially save the user $26.00 by consolidating the user's outstanding personal credit balances to a personal loan offered by the provider of system 10. As another example, the option illustrated in consolidation area 96 b will allow the user to potentially save $254.00 over a nine month introductory period by refinancing the user's outstanding personal credit balances to a credit card offered by the provider of system 10” Hildreth Column 11 Lines 37-46); display, based on the benefits analysis, consolidated loan information including at least one of a revised interest rate, a revised final total monthly payment amount, and a revised final total cost of a consolidated loan (“The user therefore obtains a snapshot of the potential products given their financing objectives. For example, referring to FIG. 9 a , output comparison area 74 b shows that the user's personal line of credit balances which currently total $9000.00 at a 20.00% interest rate can be converted to a line of credit account offered by the provider of system 10 at a 13.75% interest rate, yielding a potential monthly payment saving of $570.00” ( Hildreth Column 10 Lines 35-42) and “For example, level two output display screen 94 as shown in FIG. 12 comprises consolidation areas 96 a and 96 b . The consolidation option shown in consolidation area 96 a will potentially save the user $26.00 by consolidating the user's outstanding personal credit balances to a personal loan offered by the provider of system 10. As another example, the option illustrated in consolidation area 96 b will allow the user to potentially save $254.00 over a nine month introductory period by refinancing the user's outstanding personal credit balances to a credit card offered by the provider of system 10” ( Hildreth Column 11 Lines 37-46) and “An example of a consolidation option detail display screen is shown in FIG. 13. Consolidation option detail display screen 98 preferably shows a pictorial view of the user's current credit allocation and proposed credit allocation based on the service provider's proposed consolidation option. For example, consolidation option display screen 98 as shown in FIG. 13 includes current credit allocation pie chart 100 and proposed credit allocation pie chart 102. Current credit allocation pie chart 100 provides a breakdown of the user's current credit allocation, including the user's average annual percentage interest rate. Proposed credit allocation pie chart 102 shows the user's credit allocation and corresponding average annual percentage interest rates if the user accepts the service provider's proposal. Consolidated option detail display screen 98 also preferably includes a link which, when selected, allows the user to apply for the proposed consolidation option” Hildreth Column 11 Line 62 to Column 12 Line 11); and {…..} outstanding loans determined to result in lost benefits based on the benefits analysis (“The business decision rules implemented according to the present invention carefully consider the user's objective in light of their credit situation. For example, a user who is currently paying a 9.9% interest rate on a credit card will not be offered a credit card with an interest rate of 15% in the case where the user's objective is to lower interest rates” Hildreth Column 8 Lines 8-13). Hildreth further teaches a method for processing requests to consolidate loans at Column 12 Lines 8-11 and a non-transitory computer readable medium at Column 4 Line 63 to Column 5 Line 11. Hildreth does not teach; however Voth teaches: generate a graphical user interface including: a consolidation portion which provides a consolidation listing of the outstanding loans for inclusion in a consolidation group (“Once a loan set has been imported, it may be edited. Any selected loan may be excluded from being priced and/or a retained servicing fee for a loan may be changed. Any loan excluded will not be priced. If a retained servicing fee is changed, the new fee will preferably be used in computing the spot price the next time a mark-to-market for the loan is requested. For example, referring to FIG. 5 a, the user can delete loans from the loans to be valued set uploaded via the Loan Details user interface of the preferred embodiment of the system according to the present invention, for example, by marking a check box (e.g., “Exclude”) and then selecting a “Save Changes” action or the like” Voth Column 6 Line 56 to Column 7 Line 1); and one or more control elements associated with the outstanding loans, the one or more control elements allowing for inclusion of the outstanding loans in the consolidation group (“Once a loan set has been imported, it may be edited. Any selected loan may be excluded from being priced and/or a retained servicing fee for a loan may be changed. Any loan excluded will not be priced. If a retained servicing fee is changed, the new fee will preferably be used in computing the spot price the next time a mark-to-market for the loan is requested. For example, referring to FIG. 5 a, the user can delete loans from the loans to be valued set uploaded via the Loan Details user interface of the preferred embodiment of the system according to the present invention, for example, by marking a check box (e.g., “Exclude”) and then selecting a “Save Changes” action or the like” Voth Column 6 Line 56 to Column 7 Line 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have modified Hildreth ’s teachings to incorporate Voth’s teachings, in order “to facilitate the pricing or valuation of financial products such as mortgages and loans” Voth Column 1 Lines 63-64. Hildreth does not teach; however Conyack teaches: an exclusion portion which provides an exclusion listing of any of the outstanding loans that are excluded from the consolidation group (“This disclosure relates to loan management and analytics, and more particularly to a loan management, real-time monitoring, analytics, and data refresh system and method” (Conyack Pgh. [0003]) and “A loan pool summary for the loan pool may be displayed in a band above the list of loans highlighted, for example, in yellow and listing, for example, a total number of loans in the loan pool, the last refresh date, the total balance of the loans in the loan pool, WA coupon, WA FICO, WA LTV, WA seasoning, WA maturity, lien type, performance, and amortization if the loans in the loan pool are mortgages. However, the loan pool summary is not limited to this information, and some of this information may be omitted and/or other information may be displayed. A checkbox may be displayed next to each the loans to enable the user to select each loan individually, and a checkbox may be displayed at the top of the list to enable the user to select all of the loans simultaneously” (Conyack Pgh. [0289]-[0290]) and “An Excluded Loans LinkButton is displayed under the Edit Functions. This button is the number of loans that have been excluded from the list. Clicking this button displays an Excluded Loans pop-up window listing the loans that have been excluded. The pop-up window may list the LoanID of each excluded loan and the loan pool to which each excluded loan is assigned. The LoanID may be displayed as a link that the user can point to using a mouse or other pointing device to display a pop-up window listing Loan ID, Ext. ID, borrower name, co-borrower name, and a selection Loan Statement: Open, with a PDF icon by the word Open. The word Open is a LinkButton that when clicked displays a loan statement. The loan statement is a multi-vendor loan level report that lists all of the metrics, analyses, and other information that is available for the selected loan, and is generated by the subroutine 600 in FIG. 6. The loan statement is described in greater detail above in connection with box 1430 in FIG. 14. A checkbox is provided by each loan, and a button labeled Remove from Exclusion may be provided that when clicked will remove any checked loans from the exclusion and return them to the list of loans so they will be included in the loan pool summary displayed at the top of the report. A button labeled Close and an X button may be provided, both of which will close the Excluded Loans pop-up window” Conyack Pgh. [0420]); and update the exclusion listing to include any of the outstanding loans {…..} (“The Exclude Selected Loans from Search button when clicked removes selected loans from the list of loans and recalculates the loan pool summary displayed at the top of the report to exclude the selected loans” (Conyack Pgh. [0414]) and “An Excluded Loans LinkButton is displayed under the Edit Functions. This button is the number of loans that have been excluded from the list. Clicking this button displays an Excluded Loans pop-up window listing the loans that have been excluded. The pop-up window may list the LoanID of each excluded loan and the loan pool to which each excluded loan is assigned. The LoanID may be displayed as a link that the user can point to using a mouse or other pointing device to display a pop-up window listing Loan ID, Ext. ID, borrower name, co-borrower name, and a selection Loan Statement: Open, with a PDF icon by the word Open. The word Open is a LinkButton that when clicked displays a loan statement. The loan statement is a multi-vendor loan level report that lists all of the metrics, analyses, and other information that is available for the selected loan, and is generated by the subroutine 600 in FIG. 6. The loan statement is described in greater detail above in connection with box 1430 in FIG. 14. A checkbox is provided by each loan, and a button labeled Remove from Exclusion may be provided that when clicked will remove any checked loans from the exclusion and return them to the list of loans so they will be included in the loan pool summary displayed at the top of the report. A button labeled Close and an X button may be provided, both of which will close the Excluded Loans pop-up window” Conyack Pgh. [0420]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have modified Hildreth ’s teachings to incorporate Conyack’s teachings, in order to enable a user that intentionally excluded a loan to change the decision” Conyack Pgh. [0420]). With respect to claims 4, 12 and 20: Hildreth teaches: wherein the perform the benefits analysis comprises determine whether consolidating the outstanding loans results in a lower cost to the borrower (“For example, level two output display screen 94 as shown in FIG. 12 comprises consolidation areas 96 a and 96 b . The consolidation option shown in consolidation area 96 a will potentially save the user $26.00 by consolidating the user's outstanding personal credit balances to a personal loan offered by the provider of system 10. As another example, the option illustrated in consolidation area 96 b will allow the user to potentially save $254.00 over a nine month introductory period by refinancing the user's outstanding personal credit balances to a credit card offered by the provider of system 10” Hildreth Column 11 Lines 37-46). With respect to claims 5 and 13: Hildreth teaches: comprising further instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic computing device to determine whether consolidating the outstanding loans results in a lower overall monthly payment for the consolidated loan (“The user therefore obtains a snapshot of the potential products given their financing objectives. For example, referring to FIG. 9 a , output comparison area 74 b shows that the user's personal line of credit balances which currently total $9000.00 at a 20.00% interest rate can be converted to a line of credit account offered by the provider of system 10 at a 13.75% interest rate, yielding a potential monthly payment saving of $570.00” Hildreth Column 10 Lines 35-42). With respect to claims 8 and 16: Hildreth does not teach; however Voth teaches: comprising further instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic computing device to generate a consolidated loan window which provides a summary of the consolidated loan (“Once a loan has been imported, it may be edited. Any selected loan may be excluded from being priced and/or a retained servicing fee for a loan may be changed. Any loan excluded will not be priced. If a retained servicing fee is changed, the new fee will preferably be used in computing the spot price the next time a mark-to-market for the loan is requested. For example, referring to FIG. 5 a, the user can delete loans from the loans to be valued set uploaded via the Loan Details user interface of the preferred embodiment of the system according to the present invention, for example, by marking a check box (e.g., “Exclude”) and then selecting a “Save Changes” action or the like” Voth Column 6 Line 56 to Column 7 Line 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have modified Hildreth ’s teachings to incorporate Voth’s teachings, in order “to facilitate the pricing or valuation of financial products such as mortgages and loans” Voth Column 1 Lines 63-64 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-3, 6-7. 10-11, 14-15 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over, Hildreth (U.S. Pub. No. 7,542,921), in view of Voth (U.S. Pub. No. 7,702,580) and Conyack (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0246060) and Oppenheimer (U.S. Pat. No. 7,885,889) . With respect to claims 2, 10 and 18: Hildreth does not teach; however Oppenheimer teaches: wherein the exclusion listing further includes an explanation for excluding any of the outstanding loans (“For example, the data interfaces 18 may be used to import or export data to other external computer systems (that is, computer systems not under the control of the purchaser) or other internal computer systems (e.g., computer systems that are under the control of the purchaser but that provide functionality that is not integrated into the data processing system 12” Oppenheimer Column 6 Lines 16-18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have modified Hildreth ’s teachings to incorporate Oppenheimer’s teachings, in order “to allow a user to access data stored by the purchaser, and respond to potential problems” Oppenheimer Column 2 Lines 36-37. With respect to claims 3, 11 and 19: Hildreth does not teach; however Oppenheimer teaches: wherein the explanation includes different loan terms that make an excluded loan eligible for the consolidation group (“With respect to service granularity, the data processing system 12 represents loans as a series of attributes and uses a business rules engine to process loan information. This dramatically simplifies the process of expanding the capabilities of the data processing system 12 to process data associated with any type of loan. The capability to process a new type of loan may be added by adding an additional attribute to a list of attributes corresponding to the new product feature (or modifying existing attributes), by using the attribute to indicate the presence or absence (and/or other characteristics) of the new feature in a particular loan, and by modifying the rules engine to incorporate additional rules regarding the new loan feature” Oppenheimer Column 6 Line 65 to Column 7 Line 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have modified Hildreth ’s teachings to incorporate Oppenheimer’s teachings, in order “to allow a user to access data stored by the purchaser, and respond to potential problems” Oppenheimer Column 2 Lines 36-37. With respect to claims 6 and 14: Hildreth does not teach; however Oppenheimer teaches: comprising further instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic computing device to provide a link that is selectable to show detailed information about one of the outstanding loans in the consolidation group (“The deal management logic 82 enables authorized users creating or modifying variances to identify editable variances and facilitates transforming “codeable” variances into business rules in the delivery logic. The deal management logic 82 also facilitates communication of these variances to users responsible for analyzing them. Users responsible for analyzing variances are provided a link to the edit engine where they are able to add, modify, or delete edits based on their analyses” Oppenheimer Column 11 Lines 10-18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have modified Hildreth ’s teachings to incorporate Oppenheimer’s teachings, in order “to allow a user to access data stored by the purchaser, and respond to potential problems” Oppenheimer Column 2 Lines 36-37. With respect to claims 7 and 15: Hildreth does not teach; however Oppenheimer teaches: wherein the detailed information includes one or more of account number, account name and estimated remaining term (“The deal management logic 82 also integrates with the pricing logic 86 so that loan level price adjustments that reflect negotiated variances may be entered and displayed in the generated master agreement” (Oppenheimer Column 11 Lines 19-22) and “The pricing logic 86 may also be used to access prices set forth in pricing grids that store pricing information as a function of various loan parameters and/or features, e.g., interest rate and remaining term in connection with a particular seller” Oppenheimer Column 12 Lines 21-24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art to have modified Hildreth ’s teachings to incorporate Oppenheimer’s teachings, in order “to allow a user to access data stored by the purchaser, and respond to potential problems” Oppenheimer Column 2 Lines 36-37. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARLA HUDSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. ET. 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, Bennett Sigmond can be reached at (303) 297-4411. 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. /M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3694 /BENNETT M SIGMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 2 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 3 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 4 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 5 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 6 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 7 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 8 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 9 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 10 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 11 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 12 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 13 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 14 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 15 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 16 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 17 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 18 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 19 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 20 Art Unit: 3694 Application/Control Number: 19/098,418 Page 21 Art Unit: 3694
Prosecution Insights