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 .
Claims 1-13 are pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,907,189 (Appl. No. 16/987,756).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both are directed to similar invention with similar limitations as demonstrated in the table below:
Claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,907,189 recite similar to limitations as claims 11-20. Hence claims 1-10 are being used as representative for demonstration in the table below.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 11,907,189
A system comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to cause the system to perform,
12. The system of claim 1, wherein the memory further stores a historical performance database including a plurality of security identifiers and values associated with dates of each of the plurality of security identifiers.
13. The system of claim 1, wherein the memory further stores an event database including the set of event types and, for each event type of the set of event types, a set of event dates.
in response to receiving user input including a first event type of a set of event types and a security identifier,
obtaining, based on the first event type, a first set of event dates,
for each event date of the first set of event dates,
obtaining an event value on the event date of the security identifier,
obtaining a related date to the event date, the related date being within a date range of the event date,
obtaining a value on the related date of the security identifier,
determining a difference value, the difference value being a difference between the event value on the event date of the security identifier and the value on the related date of the security identifier, and
storing the difference value in a set of difference values,
calculating an average difference of the set of difference values, and
displaying, on a user device, the average difference and an event indicator corresponding to the first event type.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the system is further caused to perform:
obtaining a beginning value of the security identifier and an end value of the security identifier over a threshold period to calculate a normal return;
calculating the normal return as the end value less the beginning value;
determining an additional return value as the normal return less the average difference; and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero, displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the system is further caused to perform: in response to the additional return value being zero, displaying an indication on the user device that the additional return value is equal to the normal return.
4. The system of claim 2, wherein the system is further caused to perform:
determining a corresponding average difference for each day of the date range related to each event date of the first set of event dates;
storing the corresponding average difference for each day of the date range in a set of average differences;
identifying a value indicating a largest change from the set of average differences;
determining the additional return value as the normal return less the value; and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero, displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
5. The system of claim 4 wherein the date range corresponds to the first event type.
6. The system of claim 4 wherein the date range includes a pre-event date range and a post- event date range.
7. The system of claim 1 wherein the security identifier includes: (i) a stock; (ii) an option; or (iii) an exchanged-traded fund.
8. The system of claim 1 wherein: the memory stores a user parameter database including a set of security identifiers corresponding to a user of the user device, and the security identifier is a security identifier of the set of security identifiers.
9. The system of claim 1 wherein the first event type includes: (i) a change in commodity value; (ii) a change in interest rate value; or (iii) an occurrence of a natural disaster.
10. The system of claim 1 wherein receiving the user input includes:
receiving an indication of a user logging in to an account;
identifying the security identifier as a security included in a corresponding user portfolio; and
identifying the first event type as a preset event type.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the average difference of the set of difference values is weighted based on a time between the related date and an event date of the first set of event dates.
1. A system comprising:
at least one processor and a memory coupled to the at least one processor,
wherein the memory stores, a historical performance database including values associated with dates and corresponding to security identifiers;
an event database including a set of event types and, for each event type of the set of event types, a set of event dates, wherein the event types include market events; and
instructions that when executed by the at least one processor, in response to receiving user input, cause the system to perform
identifying, from the user input, a first event type and a first security identifier;
obtaining, based on the first event type, a first set of event dates from the event database;
for each event date of the first set of event dates,
obtaining, from the historical performance database, an event value on the event date of the first security identifier;
obtaining a related date to the event date, the related date being within a date range of the event date;
obtaining, from the historical performance database, a value on the related date of the first security identifier;
determining a difference value, the difference value being a difference between the event value on the event date of the first security identifier and the value on the related date of the first security identifier; and
storing the difference value in a set of difference values;
calculating an average difference of the set of difference values; and
displaying, on a user device, the average difference and an event indicator corresponding to the first event type.
2. The system of claim 1 wherein the instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause the system to perform:
obtaining, from the historical performance database, a beginning value of the first security identifier and an end value of the first security identifier;
calculating a normal difference as the end value less the beginning value;
determining an additional return value as the normal difference less the average difference; and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero, displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
3. The system of claim 2 wherein the instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause the system to perform: in response to the additional return value being zero, displaying an indication on the user device that the additional return value is equal to the normal difference.
4. The system of claim 2 wherein the instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause the system to perform:
determining a corresponding average difference for each day of the date range related to each event date of the first set of event dates;
storing the corresponding average difference for each day of the date range in a set of average differences;
identifying a value indicating a largest change from the set of average differences;
determining the additional return value as the normal difference less the value; and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero, displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
5. The system of claim 4 wherein the date range corresponds to the first event type.
6. The system of claim 4 wherein the date range includes a pre-event date range and a post-event date range.
7. The system of claim 1 wherein the first security identifier includes: (i) a stock; (ii) an option; or (iii) an exchanged-traded fund.
8. The system of claim 1 wherein: the memory stores a user parameter database including a set of security identifiers corresponding to a user of the user device, and the first security identifier includes each security identifier of the set of security identifiers.
9. The system of claim 1 wherein the event type includes: (i) a change in commodity value; (ii) a change in interest rate value; or (iii) an occurrence of a natural disaster.
10. The system of claim 1
wherein receiving the user input includes: receiving an indication of a user logging in to an account;
identifying the first security identifier as a security included in a corresponding user portfolio; and
identifying the first event type as a preset event type.
As demonstrated by the mappings in the table above, U.S. Patent No 11,907,189 discloses or renders obvious all the features of the claims of the instant application.
Claims 1-13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,321,324 (Appl. No. 18,410,445).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both are directed to similar invention with similar limitations as demonstrated in the table below:
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 12,321,324
A system comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to cause the system to perform,
in response to receiving user input including a first event type of a set of event types and a security identifier,
obtaining, based on the first event type, a first set of event dates,
13. The system of claim 1, wherein the memory further stores an event database including the set of event types and, for each event type of the set of event types, a set of event dates.
for each event date of the first set of event dates,
obtaining an event value on the event date of the security identifier,
obtaining a related date to the event date, the related date being within a date range of the event date,
12. The system of claim 1, wherein the memory further stores a historical performance database including a plurality of security identifiers and values associated with dates of each of the plurality of security identifiers.
obtaining a value on the related date of the security identifier,
determining a difference value, the difference value being a difference between the event value on the event date of the security identifier and the value on the related date of the security identifier, and
storing the difference value in a set of difference values,
calculating an average difference of the set of difference values, and
displaying, on a user device, the average difference and an event indicator corresponding to the first event type.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the system is further caused to perform:
obtaining a beginning value of the security identifier and an end value of the security identifier over a threshold period to calculate a normal return;
calculating the normal return as the end value less the beginning value;
determining an additional return value as the normal return less the average difference; and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero,
displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the system is further caused to perform: in response to the additional return value being zero, displaying an indication on the user device that the additional return value is equal to the normal return.
4. The system of claim 2, wherein the system is further caused to perform:
determining a corresponding average difference for each day of the date range related to each event date of the first set of event dates;
storing the corresponding average difference for each day of the date range in a set of average differences;
identifying a value indicating a largest change from the set of average differences;
determining the additional return value as the normal return less the value; and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero,
displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
5. The system of claim 4 wherein the date range corresponds to the first event type.
6. The system of claim 4 wherein the date range includes a pre-event date range and a post- event date range.
7. The system of claim 1 wherein the security identifier includes: (i) a stock; (ii) an option; or (iii) an exchanged-traded fund.
8. The system of claim 1 wherein: the memory stores a user parameter database including a set of security identifiers corresponding to a user of the user device, and the security identifier is a security identifier of the set of security identifiers.
9. The system of claim 1 wherein the first event type includes: (i) a change in commodity value; (ii) a change in interest rate value; or (iii) an occurrence of a natural disaster.
10. The system of claim 1 wherein receiving the user input includes:
receiving an indication of a user logging in to an account;
identifying the security identifier as a security included in a corresponding user portfolio; and
identifying the first event type as a preset event type.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the average difference of the set of difference values is weighted based on a time between the related date and an event date of the first set of event dates.
1. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing computer readable instructions, which when executed by at least one processor of a system,
in response to receiving user input, cause the system to perform,
identifying, from the user input, a first event type and a first security identifier;
obtaining, based on the first event type, a first set of event dates from an event database;
for each event date of the first set of event dates,
obtaining, from a historical performance database, an event value on the event date of the first security identifier,
obtaining a related date to the event date, the related date being within a date range of the event date,
obtaining, from the historical performance database, a value on the related date of the first security identifier,
determining a difference value, the difference value being a difference between the event value on the event date of the first security identifier and the value on the related date of the first security identifier, and
storing the difference value in a set of difference values;
calculating an average difference of the set of difference values; and
displaying, on a user device, the average difference and an event indicator corresponding to the first event type.
2. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 wherein the system is further caused to perform:
obtaining, from the historical performance database, a beginning value of the first security identifier and an end value of the first security identifier;
calculating a normal difference as the end value less the beginning value;
determining an additional return value as the normal difference less the average difference; and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero,
displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
3. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 2 wherein the system is further caused to perform: in response to the additional return value being zero, displaying an indication on the user device that the additional return value is equal to the normal difference.
4. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 2 wherein the system is further caused to perform:
determining a corresponding average difference for each day of the date range related to each event date of the first set of event dates;
storing the corresponding average difference for each day of the date range in a set of average differences;
identifying a value indicating a largest change from the set of average differences;
determining the additional return value as the normal difference less the value; and in response to the additional return value being nonzero,
displaying, on the user device, the additional return value.
5. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 4 wherein the date range corresponds to the first event type.
6. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 4 wherein the date range includes a pre-event date range and a post-event date range.
7. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 wherein the first security identifier includes: (i) a stock; (ii) an option; or (iii) an exchanged-traded fund.
8. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 wherein: a user parameter database includes a set of security identifiers corresponding to a user of the user device, and the first security identifier includes each security identifier of the set of security identifiers.
9. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 wherein the first event type includes: (i) a change in commodity value; (ii) a change in interest rate value; or (iii) an occurrence of a natural disaster.
10. The non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1 wherein receiving the user input includes:
receiving an indication of a user logging in to an account;
identifying the first security identifier as a security included in a corresponding user portfolio; and
identifying the first event type as a preset event type.
As demonstrated by the mappings in the table above, U.S. Patent No 12,321,324 discloses or renders obvious all the features of the claims of the instant application.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites mental processes in the limitations of “obtaining event dates, an event value, a related date, a value on the related date”, “determining a difference value”, and “calculating an average difference”. Each of those could be done mentally based on gathered information. Mental processes are directed to one of the abstract ideas groups as set forth by Prong One in Step 2A of the 2019 Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
In addition, the limitations of “storing the difference value” and “displaying the average difference” appear to recite insignificant extra-solution activities at Step 2A Prong Two, and also would be well-understood, routine, and conventional at Step 2B. This is nothing more than data maintaining and data outputting.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Additional elements (e.g. event types, security identifier, event date, event value, different value, average difference) are directed to types of information materials, which do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claims are more than a drafting effort design to monopolize exception, because the claimed steps could be performed in a same manner to achieve the same outcome with other types of information other than the ones being used in the claims.
Hence, the claims do not include additional elements or the combination of the elements are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception and fail to integrate the judicial exception into practical application according to Prong Two in Step 2A of the 2019 Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance because the claimed elements or their combination do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Further, in view of Step 2B of the 2019 Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, it is determined that the computing elements (such as memory, processor, user device) in the claims amount to no more than usage of a generic computing system having a generic computing components, which fails to provide an inventive concept or significantly more than abstract idea because the elements do not necessary improve the functional of a computing system or an improvement to a technical field since network computing is well known.
Dependent claim 2 further recites an additional mental process in a limitation of “obtaining a beginning value and an end value of the security identifier over a threshold period…”, “calculate the normal return”, “determine an additional return value” which could be performed mentally based on the gathered information. The additional limitation of “…displaying…the addental return value” appear to recite insignificant extra-solution activity and is nothing more than data outputting. Also, the additional elements (e.g. beginning value, end value, threshold period, normal return) are directed to types of information materials that are being manipulated, which do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
Dependent claim 3 further recites an insignificant extra-solution activity of “…displaying an indication…” that is nothing more than data outputting. Also, the additional elements (e.g. an indication) are directed to types of information materials that are being manipulated, which do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
Dependent claim 4 further recites an additional mental process in a limitation of “determining a correspond average difference.”, “identifying a value indicating a largest change”, “determining the additional return value” which correspond to generate an output based on gathered data information, which could be performed mentally based on the gathered information. The additional limitations of “storing the corresponding average difference” “displaying the additional return value” appear to recite insignificant extra-solution activities and is nothing more than data maintaining and data outputting. Also, the additional elements (e.g. a corresponding average difference, a value indicate a largest change) are directed to types of information materials that are being manipulated, which do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
Dependent claims 5-7, 9 and 11 each further recites additional elements (e.g. data range, pre-event data range, a stock, an option, an exchanged-traded fund, weight, time) in the limitations are directed to types of information materials that are being manipulated, which do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
Dependent claims 8 and 12-13 each further limitations involving usage of a generic computing component of memory performing an insignificant extra-solution activity of storing different database (i.e. a user parameter database, a historical performance database, and an event database), which is directed to a generic function of a memory since it is well known that the memory is being used to store data materials. Hence, the claimed limitations fail to provide an inventive concept or significantly more than abstract idea. Also, the additional elements (e.g. a set of security identifiers, a plurality of security identifiers, the set of event types, a set of event dates) in the limitations are directed to types of information materials that are being manipulated, which do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
Dependent claim 9 further recites an additional mental process in a limitation of “identifying the security identifier” and “identifying the first event type” which could be performed mentally based on the gathered information and data evaluation. The additional limitation of “receiving an indication of a user logging in….” appear to recite insignificant extra-solution activity and is nothing more than data gathering. Also, the additional elements (e.g. account, user portfolio) are directed to types of information materials that are being manipulated, which do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception.
Thus, for at least the reasoning above, the pending claims 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wootton et al (Pub No. US 2016/0063631, hereinafter Wootton) in view of Weber et al (Pub No. US 2015/0348193, hereinafter Weber).
Wootton is cited in the IDS filed on 5/14/2025.
With respect to claim 1, Wootton discloses a system (abstract) comprising:
a memory configured (Fig 1) to store instructions; and
at least one processor (Fig 1) configured to execute the instructions to cause the system to perform, in response to receiving user input including a first event type of a set of event types and a security identifier ([0016-0017], Fig 2: receive user input with an investment portfolio information including information of at least one event type of a set of event types as further described in [0034], and a security identifier as set forth by the assets that include stocks, bunds funds each has a respective security identifier in the portfolio as further described in [0025] ,
obtaining, based on the first event type, a first set of event dates ([0018-0019]: obtain a first set of event dates as historical information is being obtain that covers a time period with respect to the event dates),
for each event date of the first set of event dates,
obtaining an event value on the event date of the security identifier ([0014]: obtain a event value, which a merely a type of data as the historical performance values are being obtain for each security identifier for each asset for each date to determine the portfolio growth, as further described in the [0034] & [0059]),
obtaining a related date to the event date, the related date being within a date range of the event date ([0019]]: obtain a date range represented by a time period of the event date, as further described in [0060]),
obtaining a value on the related date of the security identifier ([0019]]: obtain a value on the related date of the security as the historical investment information is being obtained, as further described in [0039], [0045], [0062]).
determining a difference value, the difference value being a difference between the event value on the event date of the security identifier and the value on the related date of the security identifier ([0018-0019]: determine a difference value, such as a gain or loss value, or a return value that indicate the difference between the event value and the value on the related date of the portfolio over a period of time, as further described in [0044], ), and
storing the difference value in a set of difference values ([0018]: store the difference value in a set of different values at least as the losses, gains and returns are being stored and tracked in the historical index, as further described in [0049], [0060]),
calculating an average difference ([0019]: calculate an average difference as indicated by the historical return as further described in [0042], or by an average loss as described in [0054]), and
displaying, on a user device, the average difference and an event indicator corresponding to the first event type ([0022-0023], Fig 3: display an average, event identifier via displaying a glide path map presentation with interactive elements for difference types of information, as further described in [0065-0067]).
Wootton does not explicitly disclose calculating an average difference of the set of difference values.
However, Weber discloses calculating an average difference of the set of difference values ([0085]: calculate an average difference of the differences of the set of difference represented by an average return or an average return as further described in [0098]).
Since both Wootton and Weber are from the same field of endeavor because both are directed to data management via perform analysis operations, which is in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and combine their teachings by incorporate the average difference calculation of Weber into Wootton for data calculation and presentation as claimed. The motivation to combine is to provide a dynamic and multi-facet data management to user (Wootton, [0003]; Weber, [0002]).
With respect to claim 2, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses wherein the system is further caused to perform: obtaining a beginning value of the security identifier and an end value of the security identifier over a threshold period to calculate a normal return (Wootton, [0019], [0049]; Weber, [0011], [0014]: obtaining beginning value and end value to calculate the return corresponding the normal return, gain or loss value);
calculating the normal return as the end value less the beginning value (Wootton, [0049], [0049]; Weber, [0011], [0014]: calculated the normal return);
determining an additional return value as the normal return less the average difference (Wootton, [0039], [0049]; Weber, [0014], [0075], [0083]: determine additional value, which is merely additional data material with respect to the normal return with additional information); and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero, displaying, on the user device, the additional return value (Wootton, [0021], [0067], Fig 3; Weber, [0099-0100]: display the additional return information).
With respect to claim 3, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses
wherein the system is further caused to perform: in response to the additional return value being zero, displaying an indication on the user device that the additional return value is equal to the normal return (Wootton, [0021], [0067], Fig 3; Weber, [0099-0100]: display the additional return information indicating the return value is equal and/or different with the differences indicated).
With respect to claim 4, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses wherein the system is further caused to perform:
determining a corresponding average difference for each day of the date range related to each event date of the first set of event dates (Wootton, [0018-0019], [0067], Fig 3; Weber, [0097-0098]: determine a average difference for a date range);
storing the corresponding average difference for each day of the date range in a set of average differences (Wootton, [0021], [0067], Fig 3; Weber, [0099-0100]: store the difference for at least calculate the return);
identifying a value indicating a largest change from the set of average differences (Wootton, [0039], [0049]; Weber, [0098-0100], [0104]: identifying a values indicating a largest change in view of the values);
determining the additional return value as the normal return less the value (Wootton, [0039], [0049]; Weber, [0014], [0075], [0083]: determine additional value, which is merely additional data material with respect to the normal return with additional information); and
in response to the additional return value being nonzero, displaying, on the user device, the additional return value (Wootton, [0021], [0067], Fig 3; Weber, [0099-0100]: display the additional return information).
With respect to claim 5, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses
wherein the date range corresponds to the first event type (Wootton, [0018-0019], [0067], Fig 3; Weber, [0097-0098]: the date range or period is corresponding to a type of event).
With respect to claim 6, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses wherein the date range includes a pre-event date range and a post- event date range (Wootton, [0014], [0018-0019], Fig 3; Weber, [0097-0098]: the date range or period include a historic period that include before and after the event).
With respect to claim 7, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses
wherein the security identifier includes: (i) a stock; (ii) an option; or (iii) an exchanged-traded fund (Wootton, [0014], [0025]; Weber, [0031]: stock, exchange traded fund, option).
With respect to claim 8, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses
wherein: the memory stores a user parameter database including a set of security identifiers corresponding to a user of the user device, and the security identifier is a security identifier of the set of security identifiers (Wootton, [0017-0019], [0025]; Weber, [0032]: the memory store user parameter database represented by portfolio with a set of security identifiers as set fort by the assets with stock, funds, options securities).
With respect to claim 9, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses
wherein the first event type includes: (i) a change in commodity value; (ii) a change in interest rate value; or (iii) an occurrence of a natural disaster (Wootton, [0039-0042]; Weber, [0053]: event includes change in value, interest rate or disaster/risk).
With respect to claim 10, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses wherein receiving the user input includes: receiving an indication of a user logging in to an account (Wootton, [0016-0017]: Weber, [0036], [0039]: receive an indication of user logging in view of portfolio access correspond to an account);
identifying the security identifier as a security included in a corresponding user portfolio (Wootton, [0016], [0025]: Weber, [0016], [0036]: identify the security identifier with a security include in a user portfolio); and
identifying the first event type as a preset event type (Wootton, [0014], [0039-0042]; Weber, [0047]: identify the event type is a known type correspond to a preset event type).
With respect to claim 11, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses wherein the average difference of the set of difference values is weighted based on a time between the related date and an event date of the first set of event dates (Weber, [0059], [0098]: weight is applied to the value based on time factor).
With respect to claim 12, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses wherein the memory further stores a historical performance database including a plurality of security identifiers and values associated with dates of each of the plurality of security identifiers (Wotton, [0017-0018]; Weber, [0017-0018], Fig 9: the memory stores historic time series data correspond to a historical performance database with security identifiers of a portfolio).
With respect to claim 13, the combined teachings of Wootton and Weber further discloses wherein the memory further stores an event database including the set of event types and, for each event type of the set of event types, a set of event dates (Wotton, [0014], [0039]; Weber, [0053]: the memory stores event data correspond to a database with event types with respect to date).
Examiner Note
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraph and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle Owyang whose telephone number is (571)270-1254. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-6pm EST.
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, Charles Rones can be reached at (571)272-4085. 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.
/MICHELLE N OWYANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2168
Prosecution Insights