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
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
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
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter (See MPEP § 2106.03, subsections I and II). Claims 1-14 are directed to a computer-implemented method (i.e., process). Claims 15-19 are directed to a computer-implemented system (i.e., machine, and manufacture). Claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (i.e., manufacture). Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong One
Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(1)). Claims 1, 15 and 20 under a broadest reasonable interpretation recite an abstract idea because the claims describe matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection II). The claim limitations reciting the abstract idea are grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas because the limitations describe commercial or legal interactions, including agreements in the form of contracts, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations, and describe managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, including following rules or instructions. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea.
Claim 1:
A computer-implemented method, comprising:
receiving a request to initiate a secured transaction associated with a patient account, wherein the request is received by a server associated with an integrated service, and wherein a plurality of instances of the request are performed by the server simultaneously;
generating one or more inquiries pertaining to the secured transaction, wherein the one or more inquiries are generated using the request, and wherein the one or more inquiries are requests for information used to process the secured transaction;
transmitting, using a first custom application programming interface (API), a data request to a secured database for patient data associated with the secured transaction and the patient account;
receiving, from the secured database using the first custom API, the patient data, wherein, the patient data includes secure private data associated with the secured transaction;
populating a portion of the one or more inquiries by:
generating a comparison of the one or more inquiries to the patient data; and
identifying at least one matching inquiry based on the comparison, wherein the at least one matching inquiry indicates that an element of patient data corresponds to an inquiry from the one or more inquiries; and
facilitating presentation of the one or more inquiries on a user interface of a display device, wherein the portion of the one or more inquiries are distinguished upon presentation by populating the portion of the one or more inquiries with respective elements of patient data.
Claim 15:
A system comprising:
one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving a request to initiate a secured transaction associated with a patient account, wherein the request is received by a server associated with an integrated service, and wherein a plurality of instances of the request are performed by the server simultaneously;
generating one or more inquiries pertaining to the secured transaction, wherein the one or more inquiries are generated using the request, and wherein the one or more inquiries are requests for information used to process the secured transaction;
transmitting, using a first custom application programming interface (API), a data request to a secured database for patient data associated with the secured transaction and the patient account;
receiving, from the secured database using the first custom API, the patient data, wherein, the patient data includes secure private data associated with the secured transaction;
populating a portion of the one or more inquiries by:
generating a comparison of the one or more inquiries to the patient data; and
identifying at least one matching inquiry based on the comparison, wherein the at least one matching inquiry indicates that an element of patient data corresponds to an inquiry from the one or more inquiries; and
facilitating presentation of the one or more inquiries on a user interface of a display device, wherein the portion of the one or more inquiries are distinguished upon presentation by populating the portion of the one or more inquiries with respective elements of patient data.
Claim 20:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that when executed by one or more processors cause the processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving a request to initiate a secured transaction associated with a patient account, wherein the request is received by a server associated with an integrated service, and wherein a plurality of instances of the request are performed by the server simultaneously;
generating one or more inquiries pertaining to the secured transaction, wherein the one or more inquiries are generated using the request, and wherein the one or more inquiries are requests for information used to process the secured transaction;
transmitting, using a first custom application programming interface (API), a data request to a secured database for patient data associated with the secured transaction and the patient account;
receiving, from the secured database using the first custom API, the patient data, wherein, the patient data includes secure private data associated with the secured transaction;
populating a portion of the one or more inquiries by:
generating a comparison of the one or more inquiries to the patient data; and
identifying at least one matching inquiry based on the comparison, wherein the at least one matching inquiry indicates that an element of patient data corresponds to an inquiry from the one or more inquiries; and
facilitating presentation of the one or more inquiries on a user interface of a display device, wherein the portion of the one or more inquiries are distinguished upon presentation by populating the portion of the one or more inquiries with respective elements of patient data.
Step 2A, Prong Two
Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.04(II)(A)(2)). Examiners evaluate integration into a practical application by: (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s); and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations discussed in more detail in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1), 2106.04(d)(2), 2106.05(a) through (c) and 2106.05(e) through (h). Here, the non-underlined claim limitations above recite additional elements. The additional elements do not improve the functioning of computers, another technology, or a technical field (MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a)). The Specification does not assert that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes. The claim does not purport to improve computer capabilities, but rather invokes computers merely as a tool by adding general purpose computers post-hoc to an abstract idea. A commonplace business method being applied on a general-purpose computer is not sufficient to show an improvement to technology. The claim must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology. The Specification and the claim language provide evidence that the focus of the claim is on a scheme. An improvement in the abstract idea itself is not an improvement in technology. Even if the Specification describes technical improvements, they are not claimed. The additional elements do not apply the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2)). The additional elements do not implement the abstract idea with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim (MPEP § 2106.05(b)). A general-purpose computer that applies a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea, by use of conventional computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine. The additional elements do not transform or reduce a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP § 2106.05(c)). The claim does not recite any transformation of an article where the article changes to a different state or thing. Nor do the additional elements apply the abstract idea in a meaningful way or impose a meaningful limit on it beyond linking its use to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05(e)). The additional elements generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. A wholly generic computer implementation is not generally the sort of additional feature that provides any practical assurance that the process is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea itself. The additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). Implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. The additional elements are being used in their ordinary capacity. The additional elements do no more than merely invoke computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process. The additional elements generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Thus, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above.
Step 2B
Step 2B determines whether the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP § 2106.05). In Step 2B examiners carry over their identification of the additional element(s) in the claim from Step 2A Prong Two; carry over their conclusions from Step 2A Prong Two on the considerations discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.05(a)-(c), (e), (f) and (h); re-evaluate any additional element or combination of elements that was considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity per MPEP § 2106.05(g), because if such re-evaluation finds that the element is unconventional or otherwise more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, this finding may indicate that the additional element is no longer considered to be insignificant; and evaluate whether any additional element or combination of elements are other than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, or simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, per MPEP § 2106.05(d). The additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(f)). The additional elements generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). Individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Here, the additional elements simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry. A factual determination is required to support a conclusion that an additional element (or combination of additional elements) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Here, the specification of the application indicates that additional elements are well-known or conventional (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). There is nothing in the specification to indicate that the operations recited in the claims require any specialized hardware or inventive computer components or that the claimed invention is implemented using other than generic computer components to perform generic computer functions. The ordered combination recites no more than the individual elements do. Thus, the additional elements are not significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to the abstract idea identified above without significantly more. The claims are not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis.
Dependent Claims
Claim 2 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries;
transmitting an action request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the action request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry, wherein when the action request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager forwards the action request to a payment platform associated with the action request in accordance with the input and the element of the patient data;
receiving a response associated with the action request; and
presenting the response using a second custom GUI.
Claim 3 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries;
transmitting a credit request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the credit request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry, wherein when the credit request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager forwards the credit request to a financial institution associated with the credit request in accordance with the input and the element of the patient data;
receiving a response associated with the credit request; and
presenting the response using a second custom GUI.
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries; and
outputting a payment request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the payment request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry.
Claim 5 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
the request is transmitted by a plug-in operating from an independent software module operating on a user device; and
the computer-implemented method further comprises:
transmitting a notification to request transaction data associated with the secured transaction, wherein when the independent software module receives the notification, the independent software module transmits a transaction data request; and
transmitting data responsive to the transaction data request, wherein when received by the independent software module, the independent software module updates one or more local databases associated with the user device with the data.
Claim 6 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
outputting a status request, wherein when the status request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager provides a status associated with the secured transaction.
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
outputting a refund request, wherein the refund request includes a completed transaction and patient data associated with the completed transaction;
receiving a response associated with the refund request, wherein the response includes at least one of an approval or a denial of a refund associated with the completed transaction; and
outputting the response.
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein when the one or more inquiries are received by a user device, the user device transmits the one or more inquiries.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the display device is a patient device associated with the patient data, and
wherein inputs responsive to the one or more inquiries are received through the patient device.
Claim 10 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
outputting an additional patient data request; and
receiving additional patient data in response to the additional patient data request, wherein the additional patient data is received from the secured database, and wherein the patient data includes at least identifying information and historical completed transaction.
Claim 11 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
the display device is associated with a primary location; and
the computer-implemented method further comprises:
receiving one or more operational settings associated with the integrated service; and
installing the one or more operational settings throughout a network of secondary user devices associated with the primary location, wherein the secondary user devices are unable to alter the one or more operational settings.
Claim 12 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
receiving one or more software updates associated with the integrated service; and
automatically installing the one or more software updates on the display device.
Claim 13 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein identifying the at least one matching inquiry of the one or more inquiries is performed by a machine-learning model.
Claim 14 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
updating the secured database with data pertaining to the secured transaction.
Claim 16 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries;
transmitting an action request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the action request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry, wherein when the action request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager forwards the action request to a platform associated with the action request in accordance with the input and the element of the patient data;
receiving a response associated with the action request; and
presenting the response using a second custom GUI.
Claim 17 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries;
transmitting a credit request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the credit request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry, wherein when the credit request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager forwards the credit request to a financial institution associated with the credit request in accordance with the input and the element of the patient data;
receiving a response associated with the credit request; and
presenting the response using a second custom GUI.
Claim 18 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries; and
outputting a payment request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the payment request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry.
Claim 19 recites an abstract idea because the claim describes matching collected patient data to inquires to fill forms, grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The following underlined claim limitations recite the abstract idea. The non-underlined claim limitations recite additional elements. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are not significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements individually and in combination, merely serve as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. The additional elements, individually and in combination, are well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See Spec. 0088-0107, 0123-0142). Therefore, the claim is not eligible.
the request is transmitted by a plug-in operating from an independent software module operating on a user device; and
the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
transmitting a notification to request transaction data associated with the secured transaction, wherein when the independent software module receives the notification, the independent software module transmits a transaction data request; and
transmitting data responsive to the transaction data request, wherein when received by the independent software module, the independent software module updates one or more local databases associated with the user device with the data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Lack of Algorithm or Steps/Procedure for Performing a Computer Function
Claims 1, 15 and 20 recite “facilitating presentation …”. Claims may lack written description when the claims define the invention in functional language specifying a desired result but the specification does not sufficiently describe how the function is performed or the result is achieved. For software, this can occur when the algorithm or steps/procedure for performing the computer function are not explained at all or are not explained in sufficient detail (simply restating the function recited in the claim is not necessarily sufficient). In other words, the algorithm or steps/procedure taken to perform the function must be described with sufficient detail so that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand how the inventor intended the function to be performed. Here, Applicant’s specification merely restates the function (See Fig.4 item 412 and associated paragraph), thus it does not sufficiently describe how the function is performed or the result is achieved so that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand how the inventor intended the function to be performed. Thus, the disclosure of the application does not reasonably convey to those skilled in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed subject matter as of the filing date. It is not enough that one skilled in the art could write a program to achieve the claimed function because the specification must explain how the inventor intends to achieve the claimed function to satisfy the written description requirement. Therefore, the claim fails written description and is thus rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. See MPEP 2161.01.
Claims 2-14 and 16-19 are also rejected per dependency upon a rejected claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Unclear Scope
Claim 15 is directed to a product (e.g., "A system comprising: ...”). For products, the claim limitations will define discrete physical structures or materials (See MPEP 2103(I)(C)). Here, claim 15 recites that the "system" comprises structural recitations of the "one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable medium". However, claim 15 also after the “comprising:” language, recites other structural recitations and associated functions (e.g., “receiving a request to initiate a secured transaction associated with a patient account, wherein the request is received by a server associated with an integrated service, and wherein a plurality of instances of the request are performed by the server simultaneously”). Therefore, it is unclear whether claim 15 is directed to structural recitations of the "one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable medium", or directed to a combination of structural recitations of the "one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable medium" and the “server”. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. For purposes of compact prosecution, Examiner is interpretating the claim as the "system" comprising structural recitations of the combination.
Claim 20 recite “A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that when executed by one or more processors cause the processors to perform operations comprising: receiving a request to initiate a secured transaction associated with a patient account, wherein the request is received by a server associated with an integrated service, and wherein a plurality of instances of the request are performed by the server simultaneously”. The claimed “receiving” is performed by both the server and the one or more processors. Thus, it is unclear whether the server comprises the one or more processors or not. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. For purposes of compact prosecution, Examiner is interpretating the claim as the server comprising the one or more processors.
See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 13USPQ2d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 1989) and MPEP 2173.02 (III)(B) which states “Examiners should bear in mind that "[a]n essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.”
Claims 16-19 are also rejected per dependency upon a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-10, 12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2021/0256490 A1 (“Bain”).
Claims 1, 15 and 20:
Bain discloses:
A computer-implemented method, comprising: [one or more processors and a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:] [A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that when executed by one or more processors cause the processors to perform operations comprising:] (0031, 0048, 0067-0075)
receiving a request to initiate a secured transaction associated with a patient account, wherein the request is received by a server associated with an integrated service, and wherein a plurality of instances of the request are performed by the server simultaneously; (0031, 0049-0050)
generating one or more inquiries pertaining to the secured transaction, wherein the one or more inquiries are generated using the request, and wherein the one or more inquiries are requests for information used to process the secured transaction; (0033, 0039, 0052-0053, 0057)
transmitting, using a first custom application programming interface (API), a data request to a secured database for patient data associated with the secured transaction and the patient account; (0029, 0033, 0045, 0050, 0054-0055)
receiving, from the secured database using the first custom API, the patient data, wherein, the patient data includes secure private data associated with the secured transaction; (0029, 0033, 0043, 0050, 0055)
populating a portion of the one or more inquiries by: (0043, 0052, 0058)
generating a comparison of the one or more inquiries to the patient data; and (0043, 0053)
identifying at least one matching inquiry based on the comparison, wherein the at least one matching inquiry indicates that an element of patient data corresponds to an inquiry from the one or more inquiries; and (0043, 0052-0053)
facilitating presentation of the one or more inquiries on a user interface of a display device, wherein the portion of the one or more inquiries are distinguished upon presentation by populating the portion of the one or more inquiries with respective elements of patient data. (0033, 0046, 0052, 0059)
Claims 2 and 16:
Bain discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 15. Bain further discloses:
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (0031, 0048, 0067-0075)
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries; (0052-0053, 0057, 0059)
transmitting an action request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the action request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry, wherein when the action request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager forwards the action request to a payment platform associated with the action request in accordance with the input and the element of the patient data; (0042-0043, 0057-0058, 0061-0062)
receiving a response associated with the action request; and (0035, 0056, 0058, 0061-0062)
presenting the response using a second custom GUI. (0033, 0058-0059, 0061)
Claims 3 and 17:
Bain discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 15. Bain further discloses:
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (0031, 0048, 0067-0075)
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries; (0052-0053, 0057, 0059)
transmitting a credit request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the credit request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry, wherein when the credit request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager forwards the credit request to a financial institution associated with the credit request in accordance with the input and the element of the patient data; (0035, 0039, 0042-0043, 0055, 0057-0058)
receiving a response associated with the credit request; and (0035, 0056, 0058, 0061-0062)
presenting the response using a second custom GUI. (0033, 0058-0059, 0061)
Claims 4 and 18:
Bain discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 15. Bain further discloses:
wherein the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (0031, 0048, 0067-0075)
receiving input responsive to the one or more inquiries; and (0052-0053, 0057, 0059)
outputting a payment request associated with the secured transaction, wherein the payment request includes the input responsive to the one or more inquiries and the element of the patient data responsive to the at least one matching inquiry. (0042-0043, 0058, 0061-0062)
Claims 5 and 19:
Bain discloses all limitations of claims 1 and 15. Bain further discloses:
the request is transmitted by a plug-in operating from an independent software module operating on a user device; and (0032-0033, 0048, 0066)
the computer-implemented method further comprises: [the instructions further cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:] (0031, 0048, 0067-0075)
transmitting a notification to request transaction data associated with the secured transaction, wherein when the independent software module receives the notification, the independent software module transmits a transaction data request; and (0042-0043, 0049-0050, 0058)
transmitting data responsive to the transaction data request, wherein when received by the independent software module, the independent software module updates one or more local databases associated with the user device with the data. (0043-0045, 0076)
Claim 6:
Bain discloses all limitations of claim 1. Bain further discloses:
outputting a status request, wherein when the status request is received by a transaction manager, the transaction manager provides a status associated with the secured transaction. (0042, 0058, 0061-0062, 0064-0065)
Claim 7:
Bain discloses all limitations of claim 1. Bain further discloses:
outputting a refund request, wherein the refund request includes a completed transaction and patient data associated with the completed transaction; (0040, 0062-0064)
receiving a response associated with the refund request, wherein the response includes at least one of an approval or a denial of a refund associated with the completed transaction; and (0058, 0064-0065)
outputting the response. (0059, 0061)
Claim 8:
Bain discloses all limitations of claim 1. Bain further discloses:
wherein when the one or more inquiries are received by a user device, the user device transmits the one or more inquiries. (0042, 0049-0050, 0059, 0066)
Claim 9:
Bain discloses all limitations of claim 1. Bain further discloses:
wherein the display device is a patient device associated with the patient data, and (0031, 0046-0047, 0066)
wherein inputs responsive to the one or more inquiries are received through the patient device. (0047, 0052-0053, 0066)
Claim 10:
Bain discloses all limitations of claim 1. Bain further discloses:
outputting an additional patient data request; and (0050, 0057-0058)
receiving additional patient data in response to the additional patient data request, wherein the additional patient data is received from the secured database, and wherein the patient data includes at least identifying information and historical completed transaction. (0045, 0050, 0055)
Claim 12:
Bain discloses all limitations of claim 1. Bain further discloses:
receiving one or more software updates associated with the integrated service; and (0034, 0039, 0070)
automatically installing the one or more software updates on the display device. (0048, 0070-0071)
Claim 14:
Bain discloses all limitations of claim 1. Bain further discloses:
updating the secured database with data pertaining to the secured transaction. (0044-0045, 0062)
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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bain in view of US 2013/0017806 A1 (“Sprigg”).
Claim 11:
Bain discloses:
the display device is associated with a primary location; and (0035, 0050, 0066)
the computer-implemented method further comprises: (0031, 0048, 0067-0075)
receiving one or more operational settings associated with the integrated service; and (0032, 0038, 0055)
Bain does not disclose:
installing the one or more operational settings throughout a network of secondary user devices associated with the primary location, wherein the secondary user devices are unable to alter the one or more operational settings.
Sprigg, an analogous art of mobile communications, discloses:
installing the one or more operational settings throughout a network of secondary user devices associated with the primary location (0023-0024, 0090-0091), wherein the secondary user devices are unable to alter the one or more operational settings. (0033, 0039)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bain to include installing the one or more operational settings throughout a network of secondary user devices associated with the primary location, wherein the secondary user devices are unable to alter the one or more operational settings, as disclosed in Sprigg. One or ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to improve security (See Sprigg, 0001-0003]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bain in view of US 2023/0088474 A1 (“Sragow”).
Claim 13:
Bain does not disclose:
wherein identifying the at least one matching inquiry of the one or more inquiries is performed by a machine-learning model.
Sragow, an analogous art of patient health data management, discloses:
wherein identifying the at least one matching inquiry of the one or more inquiries is performed by a machine-learning model. (0228-0244)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bain to include identifying the at least one matching inquiry of the one or more inquiries is performed by a machine-learning model, as disclosed in Sragow. One or ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to improve security (See Sragow, 0002-0004]).
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2012/0239417 A1 (“Pourfallah”) discloses: The HEALTHCARE WALLET PAYMENT PROCESSING APPARATUSES, METHODS AND SYSTEMS (hereinafter “H-Wallet”) transforms patient insurance information, and healthcare procedure schedule information inputs via H-Wallet components into medical claim settlement outputs. In one embodiment, a method is disclosed, comprising: obtaining a user healthcare payment request including user credentials; retrieving healthcare product details and a payment amount from the user healthcare payment request; obtaining balance information of a list of user accounts; determining a recommended account for the obtained user healthcare payment request based on the retrieved healthcare product details, payment amount and the obtained balance information; transmitting a list of user account including the recommended account with the obtained balance information to the user mobile device; receiving a user selection of the recommended account; verifying payment eligibility of the recommended account for the obtained payment request; and processing fund transfer from the recommended account to a healthcare provider.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ari Shahabi whose telephone number is (571)272-2565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00-5:00.
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, John W Hayes can be reached at 571-272-6708. 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.
/ARI SHAHABI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights