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 .
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1, claims 1-8 and 18-20 in the reply filed on March 19, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-8 and 18-20 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits.
Priority
Application 19/154,099 filed on 08/06/2025 is a 371 of PCT/US2023/062901 02/20/2023.
Examiner Request
The Applicant is requested to indicate where in the specification there is support for amendments to claims should Applicant amend. The purpose of this is to reduce potential 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) or § 112 1st paragraph issues that can arise when claims are amended without support in the specification. The Examiner thanks the Applicant in advance.
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 1-8 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. (MPEP 2106). The claims are directed to a method and apparatus which is one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES). The recitation of the claimed invention is analyzed as follows, in which the abstract elements are boldfaced.
Claim 1 recites the limitations of:
A method for reducing communications between nodes in a distributed system, the method comprising:
receiving, by each node in a distributed system, a correlation function with a plurality of inputs comprising at least an identifier;
receiving, at a node of the distributed system, a request comprising the identifier;
identifying, by the node, a service node to serve the request based on the correlation function, the identifying comprising:
determining, by the node, based on a status of the node, the status of other nodes in the distributed system,
determining a local state, based on at least one of the status of the node, the status of the other nodes, or a number of nodes in the distributed system; and calculating, based on the local state and the plurality of inputs, a target response that identifies the service node; and
processing the request by the service node.
The claim as a whole recites a method that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers collecting, analyzing, and transmitting data to facilitate conducting a financial transaction and related activities -- at least one of a payment request, or a payment-reversal request. This is a fundamental economic practice of a financial transaction; a commercial interaction, such as for business relations; and managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, which are certain methods of organizing human activity.
Furthermore, the claims cover the use of a computer system to provide for collecting, analyzing, and transmitting data to facilitate conducting a financial transaction and related activities. As the steps could be performed by a human without a computer, the claim limitations fall within the mental processes grouping, and the claim recites an abstract idea.
Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea. (Step 2A, prong 1: YES).
Moreover, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Other than reciting a “nodes in a distributed system”, “a service node”, and “other nodes in the distributed system”, to perform the steps of “identifying”, “determining”, and “processing”, nothing in the claim elements preclude the steps from practically being a certain method for organizing human activity or mental process. The claim as a whole does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claim merely describes how to generally “apply” the concept of collecting, analyzing, and transmitting data to facilitate conducting a financial transaction and related activities in a computer environment. The additional computer elements recited in the claim limitations are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception utilizing generic computer components.
For example, the Specification discloses “[0042] As used herein, the term "computing device" or "computer device" may refer to one or more electronic devices that are configured to directly or indirectly communicate with or over one or more networks. A computing device may be a mobile device, a desktop computer, and/or the like. As an example, a mobile device may include a cellular phone (e.g., a smartphone or standard cellular phone), a portable computer, a wearable device (e.g., watches, glasses, lenses, clothing, and/or the like), a personal digital assistant (PDA), and/or other like devices. The computing device may not be a mobile device, such as a desktop computer. Furthermore, the term "computer" may refer to any computing device that includes the necessary components to send, receive, process, and/or output data, and normally includes a display device, a processor, a memory, an input device, a network interface, and/or the like.” “[0044] An "interface", "payment interface", or "transaction interface" may include any software module configured to process communications. For example, an interface may be configured to receive, process, and respond to a particular entity in a particular communication format. Further, a computer, device, and/or system may include any number of interfaces depending on the functionality and capabilities of the computer, device, and/or system. In some embodiments or aspects, an interface may include an application programming interface (API) or other communication format or protocol that may be provided to third parties or to a particular entity to allow for communication with a device. Additionally, an interface may be designed based on functionality, a designated entity configured to communicate with, or any other variable. For example, an interface may be configured to allow for a system to field a particular request or may be configured to allow a particular entity to communicate with the system.”
Thus, the specification supports that general purpose computers or computer components are utilized to implement the steps of the abstract idea.
Merely implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. The claim as a whole, in viewing the additional elements both individually and in combination, does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. (Step 2A prong two: No)
The claim does not include additional elements, when considered both individually and as an ordered combination, 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 “nodes in a distributed system”, “a service node”, and “other nodes in the distributed system”, to perform the steps of “identifying”, “determining”, and “processing”, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer component. The claim merely describes how to generally “apply” the concept of collecting, analyzing, and transmitting data to facilitate conducting a financial transaction and related activities in a computer environment. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. Such additional elements are determined to not contain an inventive concept according to MPEP 2106.05(f). It should be noted that (1) the “recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words “apply it”, and (2) “Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice, commercial interaction, or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, mental process, or mathematical calculation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more”.
Claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 1, thus, it is rejected on similar grounds.
Claim 18 recites that additional elements of “A non-transitory machine readable medium storing code, which when executed by a processor is configured to:”.
For similar reasons as explained above with regard to claim 1, under Step 2A, prong two, these additional elements are merely applying generic computer components to implement the abstract idea. Under Step 2B, when viewing the additional elements individually and in combination, the additional elements do not amount to an inventive concept amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception itself as the claimed computer-related technologies are mere tools for implementing the abstract idea as explained with regard to claim 1.
Dependent claims 2-8 and 19-20 merely limit the abstract idea and do not recite any further additional elements beyond the cited abstract idea and the elements addressed above, thus, they do not amount to significantly more. The dependent claims are abstract for the reasons presented above because there are no additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Thus, the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea. (Step 2B: No)
Therefore, claims 1-8 and 18-20 are not patent-eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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 1-8 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ur, U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0198886; in view of Li, WIPO Patent Application Publication Number 2021/047445.
As per claim 1,
Ur explicitly teaches:
a correlation function with a plurality of inputs comprising at least an identifier;
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 12-15, 274-280) ("[0013] Embodiments of the system may calculate or determine, by any appropriate routing algorithm as known in the art a plurality of available routing paths that may connect the two nodes of the computer network. [0014] The neural network may receive the plurality of available routing paths, and may be configured to produce a selection of an optimal route for the requested transaction from a plurality of available routes or paths, based on the FV, and the routing engine may be configured to route the requested transaction through the computer network according to the selection." "[0028] Embodiments of the present invention may include a system and a method for routing transactions within a computer network, by at least one processor. Embodiments of the method may include: [0029] receiving a transaction request to route a transaction between one of a plurality of source nodes and a destination node of the computer network; [0030] extracting from the transaction request one or more transaction parameters pertaining to the destination node; [0031] receiving a set of source preference weights wherein each source preference weight corresponds to a transaction parameter; [0032] selecting a source node from the plurality of source nodes based on at least one received source preference weight and at least one corresponding transaction parameter;")
receiving, at a node of the distributed system, a request comprising the identifier;
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 27-35, 157-159, 274-280) ("[0028] Embodiments of the present invention may include a system and a method for routing transactions within a computer network, by at least one processor. Embodiments of the method may include: [0029] receiving a transaction request to route a transaction between one of a plurality of source nodes and a destination node of the computer network; [0030] extracting from the transaction request one or more transaction parameters pertaining to the destination node; [0031] receiving a set of source preference weights wherein each source preference weight corresponds to a transaction parameter; [0032] selecting a source node from the plurality of source nodes based on at least one received source preference weight and at least one corresponding transaction parameter;" "[0158] As shown in FIG. 2, system 200 may receive a transaction request 206, to perform a transaction between a source node (e.g., 202-a) and a destination node (e.g.: 202-c). According to some embodiments, processor 201 may be configured to: analyze transaction request 206 (as explained further below); identify one or more available routing paths (e.g. route A and route B) that connect the source node and destination node; and select an optimal routing path (e.g. route A) for the requested transaction." "[0276] Transaction request 206 may include one or more transaction parameters pertaining to one or more source nodes. For example, transaction request 206 may include at least one identifier (e.g., an IP address) of one or more source nodes. [0277] Transaction request 206 may include one or more transaction parameters pertaining to the destination node. For example, transaction request 206 may include at least one data element pertaining to issuance of the paying card by the paying card issuer (e.g., details of the paying card of the client such as the Bank Identification Number (BIN) of the paying card's issuing bank).")
identifying, by the node, a service node to serve the request based on the correlation function, the identifying comprising: determining, by the node, based on a status of the node, the status of other nodes in the distributed system;
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 12-15, 274-280) ("[0013] Embodiments of the system may calculate or determine, by any appropriate routing algorithm as known in the art a plurality of available routing paths that may connect the two nodes of the computer network. [0014] The neural network may receive the plurality of available routing paths, and may be configured to produce a selection of an optimal route for the requested transaction from a plurality of available routes or paths, based on the FV, and the routing engine may be configured to route the requested transaction through the computer network according to the selection.")
determining a local state, based on at least one of the status of the node, the status of the other nodes, or a number of nodes in the distributed system; and
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 50-60) ("[0052] The one or more transaction parameters further may include at least one of: a feature of the FV and a GC parameter. [0053] Obtaining one or more transaction parameters may include calculating at least one cost metric, selected from a list consisting of: [0054] transaction success fees per at least one available route; [0055] transaction failure fees per at least one available route; [0056] transaction cancellation per at least one available route; [0057] currency conversion spread per the at least one available route; [0058] currency conversion markup per the at least one available route; and [0059] net present value (NPV) of the requested transaction per the at least one available route, and wherein the one or more transaction parameters may include at least one cost metric. [0060] The one or more transaction parameters may include at least one of: a feature of the FV, a GC parameter and a cost metric. [0061] Selecting one or more routing paths from the plurality of available routing paths as optimal may include: [0062] providing at least one transaction parameter as a first input to a neural-network (NN); [0063] providing at least one respective source preference weight as a second input to the NN; [0064] providing the plurality of available routes as a third input to the neural-network; and [0065] obtaining, from the NN, a selection of one or more optimal routing paths based on at least one of the first, second and third inputs.")
calculating, based on the local state and the plurality of inputs, a target response that identifies the service node; and
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 60-70) ("[0061] Selecting one or more routing paths from the plurality of available routing paths as optimal may include: [0062] providing at least one transaction parameter as a first input to a neural-network (NN); [0063] providing at least one respective source preference weight as a second input to the NN; [0064] providing the plurality of available routes as a third input to the neural-network; and [0065] obtaining, from the NN, a selection of one or more optimal routing paths based on at least one of the first, second and third inputs.")
processing the request by the service node.
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 391-393) ("[0392] As shown in step 3035, the processor may route (e.g., by routing module 209) the requested transaction through nodes of the computer network according to the routing scheme. Routing module 209 may route the requested transaction through by any appropriate routing protocol (e.g., RIP) as known in the art.")
Ur does not explicitly teach, however, Li does teach:
A method for reducing communications between nodes in a distributed system, the method comprising: receiving, by each node in a distributed system, [a correlation function] with a plurality of inputs [comprising at least an identifier];
(Li WO2021047445 at pp. 4, 8-10) ("Any one of the routing nodes 34 includes functional modules that provide an authentication service 341, a certificate cache 342, a routing service 343, and a P2P service 344. The authentication service 341 is used to verify the identity of the business node in the business sub-network, the certificate cache 342 is used to cache the identity certificate of each node, the routing service 343 is used to realize the network isolation between the business sub-network and the consensus sub-network, and the P2P service Used to distribute tasks among idempotent routing nodes." "As can be seen from the consensus sub-network introduced above, the consensus sub-network includes multiple consensus nodes. These consensus nodes are idempotent. There is no difference in sending any data processing request to any consensus node in the consensus sub-network. However, due to fluctuations and imbalances of network traffic, the consensus sub-network may have insufficient processing performance for data processing requests, thereby reducing the service performance of the overall blockchain network. For this reason, a request distribution strategy is configured on the routing node, according to each consensus node The load capacity is balanced to forward data processing requests to different consensus nodes.")
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ur and Li, because it allows for an improved system ensuring the network security within the consensus sub-network, and can also forward data processing requests in a balanced manner to improve the consensus sub-network’s performance Processing performance. (Li at Abstract and pp. 3-4).
As per claim 2,
Ur explicitly teaches:
further comprising: transmitting, by the node, the request to the service node.
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 157-166, 391-393) ("[0158] As shown in FIG. 2, system 200 may receive a transaction request 206, to perform a transaction between a source node (e.g., 202-a) and a destination node (e.g.: 202-c). According to some embodiments, processor 201 may be configured to: analyze transaction request 206 (as explained further below); identify one or more available routing paths (e.g. route A and route B) that connect the source node and destination node; and select an optimal routing path (e.g. route A) for the requested transaction." "[0165] From the merchant's computer 202-a, the transaction may be routed to a payment service provider (PSP) 202-b, which offers shops online services for accepting electronic payments by a variety of payment methods, as known to persons skilled in the art of online banking methods." "[0392] As shown in step 3035, the processor may route (e.g., by routing module 209) the requested transaction through nodes of the computer network according to the routing scheme. Routing module 209 may route the requested transaction through by any appropriate routing protocol (e.g., RIP) as known in the art.")
As per claim 3,
Ur explicitly teaches:
further comprising: receiving, by the service node, the request transmitted from the node.
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 157-166, 391-393) ("[0158] As shown in FIG. 2, system 200 may receive a transaction request 206, to perform a transaction between a source node (e.g., 202-a) and a destination node (e.g.: 202-c). According to some embodiments, processor 201 may be configured to: analyze transaction request 206 (as explained further below); identify one or more available routing paths (e.g. route A and route B) that connect the source node and destination node; and select an optimal routing path (e.g. route A) for the requested transaction." "[0165] From the merchant's computer 202-a, the transaction may be routed to a payment service provider (PSP) 202-b, which offers shops online services for accepting electronic payments by a variety of payment methods, as known to persons skilled in the art of online banking methods." "[0392] As shown in step 3035, the processor may route (e.g., by routing module 209) the requested transaction through nodes of the computer network according to the routing scheme. Routing module 209 may route the requested transaction through by any appropriate routing protocol (e.g., RIP) as known in the art.")
As per claim 4,
Ur explicitly teaches:
further comprising: receiving, by the node, a transmitted request from another node in the distributed system for processing, wherein the another node identified the node as the service node; and processing, by the node, the transmitted request.
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 157-166, 391-393) ("[0158] As shown in FIG. 2, system 200 may receive a transaction request 206, to perform a transaction between a source node (e.g., 202-a) and a destination node (e.g.: 202-c). According to some embodiments, processor 201 may be configured to: analyze transaction request 206 (as explained further below); identify one or more available routing paths (e.g. route A and route B) that connect the source node and destination node; and select an optimal routing path (e.g. route A) for the requested transaction.")
As per claim 5,
Ur explicitly teaches:
wherein the node is the service node.
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 157-166, 391-393) ("[0158] As shown in FIG. 2, system 200 may receive a transaction request 206, to perform a transaction between a source node (e.g., 202-a) and a destination node (e.g.: 202-c). According to some embodiments, processor 201 may be configured to: analyze transaction request 206 (as explained further below); identify one or more available routing paths (e.g. route A and route B) that connect the source node and destination node; and select an optimal routing path (e.g. route A) for the requested transaction.")
As per claim 6,
Ur explicitly teaches:
wherein the correlation function is configured to generate [a mutually exclusive] output based on the plurality of inputs.
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 12-15, 274-280) ("[0013] Embodiments of the system may calculate or determine, by any appropriate routing algorithm as known in the art a plurality of available routing paths that may connect the two nodes of the computer network. [0014] The neural network may receive the plurality of available routing paths, and may be configured to produce a selection of an optimal route for the requested transaction from a plurality of available routes or paths, based on the FV, and the routing engine may be configured to route the requested transaction through the computer network according to the selection." "[0028] Embodiments of the present invention may include a system and a method for routing transactions within a computer network, by at least one processor. Embodiments of the method may include: [0029] receiving a transaction request to route a transaction between one of a plurality of source nodes and a destination node of the computer network; [0030] extracting from the transaction request one or more transaction parameters pertaining to the destination node; [0031] receiving a set of source preference weights wherein each source preference weight corresponds to a transaction parameter; [0032] selecting a source node from the plurality of source nodes based on at least one received source preference weight and at least one corresponding transaction parameter;")
Ur does not explicitly teach, however, Li does teach:
a mutually exclusive output
(Li WO2021047445 at pp. 4, 8-10) ("Any one of the routing nodes 34 includes functional modules that provide an authentication service 341, a certificate cache 342, a routing service 343, and a P2P service 344. The authentication service 341 is used to verify the identity of the business node in the business sub-network, the certificate cache 342 is used to cache the identity certificate of each node, the routing service 343 is used to realize the network isolation between the business sub-network and the consensus sub-network, and the P2P service Used to distribute tasks among idempotent routing nodes." "As can be seen from the consensus sub-network introduced above, the consensus sub-network includes multiple consensus nodes. These consensus nodes are idempotent. There is no difference in sending any data processing request to any consensus node in the consensus sub-network. However, due to fluctuations and imbalances of network traffic, the consensus sub-network may have insufficient processing performance for data processing requests, thereby reducing the service performance of the overall blockchain network. For this reason, a request distribution strategy is configured on the routing node, according to each consensus node The load capacity is balanced to forward data processing requests to different consensus nodes.")
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ur and Li, because it allows for an improved system ensuring the network security within the consensus sub-network, and can also forward data processing requests in a balanced manner to improve the consensus sub-network’s performance Processing performance. (Li at Abstract and pp. 3-4).
As per claim 7,
Ur explicitly teaches:
wherein the correlation function produces [a mutually exclusive] output [to allow each node in the distributed system of] nodes to determine a service node of the request.
(Ur US20230198886 at paras. 12-15, 274-280) ("[0013] Embodiments of the system may calculate or determine, by any appropriate routing algorithm as known in the art a plurality of available routing paths that may connect the two nodes of the computer network. [0014] The neural network may receive the plurality of available routing paths, and may be configured to produce a selection of an optimal route for the requested transaction from a plurality of available routes or paths, based on the FV, and the routing engine may be configured to route the requested transaction through the computer network according to the selection." "[0028] Embodiments of the present invention may include a system and a method for routing transactions within a computer network, by at least one processor. Embodiments of the method may include: [0029] receiving a transaction request to route a transaction between one of a plurality of source nodes and a destination node of the computer network; [0030] extracting from the transaction request one or more transaction parameters pertaining to the destination node; [0031] receiving a set of source preference weights wherein each source preference weight corresponds to a transaction parameter; [0032] selecting a source node from the plurality of source nodes based on at least one received source preference weight and at least one corresponding transaction parameter;")
Ur does not explicitly teach, however, Li does teach:
a mutually exclusive output to allow each node in the distributed system of nodes to determine
(Li WO2021047445 at pp. 4, 8-10) ("Any one of the routing nodes 34 includes functional modules that provide an authentication service 341, a certificate cache 342, a routing service 343, and a P2P service 344. The authentication service 341 is used to verify the identity of the business node in the business sub-network, the certificate cache 342 is used to cache the identity certificate of each node, the routing service 343 is used to realize the network isolation between the business sub-network and the consensus sub-network, and the P2P service Used to distribute tasks among idempotent routing nodes." "As can be seen from the consensus sub-network introduced above, the consensus sub-network includes multiple consensus nodes. These consensus nodes are idempotent. There is no difference in sending any data processing request to any consensus node in the consensus sub-network. However, due to fluctuations and imbalances of network traffic, the consensus sub-network may have insufficient processing performance for data processing requests, thereby reducing the service performance of the overall blockchain network. For this reason, a request distribution strategy is configured on the routing node, according to each consensus node The load capacity is balanced to forward data processing requests to different consensus nodes.")
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ur and Li, because it allows for an improved system ensuring the network security within the consensus sub-network, and can also forward data processing requests in a balanced manner to improve the consensus sub-network’s performance Processing performance. (Li at Abstract and pp. 3-4).
As per claim 8,
Ur does not explicitly teach, however, Li does teach:
wherein the determining of a local state is based on the status of the node, the status of the other nodes, and the number of nodes in the distributed system.
(Li WO2021047445 at pp. 3-4) ("As can be seen from the consensus sub-network introduced above, the consensus sub-network includes multiple consensus nodes. These consensus nodes are idempotent." "The operating load represents the processing task volume of each consensus node in the current consensus sub-network, and the operating load can be represented by the number of data processing requests currently to be processed by the consensus node. Specifically, each consensus node can actively report the current operating load on a regular basis, or the routing node can obtain the operating load from each consensus node." "S408: According to the operating load, determine a target consensus node for processing the data processing request from the consensus sub-network. Specifically, the routing node can determine a target consensus node with a relatively small operating load from each consensus node according to the operating load of each consensus node, and forward the data processing request to the determined target consensus node, which is performed by the target consensus node. Corresponding data processing, in this way, even if the number of data processing requests initiated by business nodes is large, they can be evenly distributed to the consensus nodes in the consensus sub-network to ensure the service performance of the blockchain network.")
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ur and Li, because it allows for an improved system ensuring the network security within the consensus sub-network, and can also forward data processing requests in a balanced manner to improve the consensus sub-network’s performance Processing performance. (Li at Abstract and pp. 3-4).
Claims 18, 19, and 20 are substantially similar to claims 1, 2, and 8, thus, they are rejected on similar grounds.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is available for review on Form PTO-892 Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MERRITT J HASBROUCK whose telephone number is (571)272-3109. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00.
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, Christine Tran can be reached on 571-272-8103. 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.
/MERRITT J HASBROUCK/Examiner, Art Unit 3695
/CHRISTINE M Tran/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3695
Prosecution Insights