DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgments
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in reply to the application and preliminary amendment filed on 05/30/2025.
Claims 21-40 have been added.
Claims 1-20 have been canceled.
Claims 21-40 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 05/30/2025 has been considered. An initialed copy of the Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
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 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,346,415 B2, hereinafter the ‘415 patent. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Each of the ‘415 patent as well as this presently claimed invention are directed towards a method and system of managing distribution of at least one license to one or more features defined in feature categories.
Independent claim 1 of the ‘415 patent recites
accepting a purchase request, the purchase request specifying a plurality of feature purchases which are included in a plurality of different said feature categories, each feature purchase defining a respective number of purchase feature units and a purchase temporal term for each of said plurality of said feature categories, where a plurality of features units for different features are included within the same feature category, where each of said plurality of different features included within the same feature category share said respective number of purchase features units and said purchase temporal time, and each feature belonging to only one of the feature categories;
pooling the feature purchases within each feature category to a number of purchase feature credits of a uniform credit temporal term, where said respective number of purchase feature units for a first plurality of different said features correspond to a first said feature category, where said respective number of purchase feature units for a second plurality of different said features correspond to a second said feature category, where said first feature category corresponds to a first set of features not included in said second feature category which corresponds to a second set of features;
accepting a request for a license, the request specifying a license temporal term of temporal duration, and the request for the license comprising, for each license request feature category:
the feature category from among a plurality different said feature categories;
a number of license feature units within the respective feature category where a first set of license feature units for a respective first said feature category is attributed against a first pool of license feature units for said first feature category and where a second set of license feature units for a respective second said feature category is attributed against a second pool of license feature units for said first feature category, where said first pool of license feature units is separate from said second pool of license feature units;
computing, for each license request feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the respective request for the license, according to a start date and the license temporal term of said temporal duration separately for each said feature category;
decrementing the number of purchase feature credits in each feature category from a respective pool of feature license units for a particular feature category according to the number of license feature credits consumed in the respective feature category; and
selectively providing the requested license for a respective pool of feature license units for a particular feature category based upon where a sufficient number of license feature credits are available in each feature category such that a corresponding computing device uses the requested license to active corresponding features.
Independent claim 21 of this current application differs since omits the following limitations:
where said respective number of purchase feature units for a first plurality of different said features correspond to a first said feature category, where said respective number of purchase feature units for a second plurality of different said features correspond to a second said feature category, where said first feature category corresponds to a first set of features not included in said second feature category which corresponds to a second set of features;
a number of license feature units within the respective feature category where a first set of license feature units for a respective first said feature category is attributed against a first pool of license feature units for said first feature category and where a second set of license feature units for a respective second said feature category is attributed against a second pool of license feature units for said first feature category, where said first pool of license feature units is separate from said second pool of license feature units;
computing, for each license request feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the respective request for the license, according to a start date and the license temporal term of said temporal duration separately for each said feature category;
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify claims of the ‘415 patent by removing the limitations directed to license feature units resulting generally in the claims of the present application since the claims of the present application and the claims recited in the ‘415 patent actually perform a similar function. It is well settled that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969). Omission of a reference element whose function is not needed would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
In this case, the limitation as claimed by the invention is merely an improvement over a base device, product, or method as taught by the references. The specifications also teach a comparable device improved in the same way. The technical ability existed to improve the base device in the same way and the result of the improvement is predictable. (KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)). Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date to combine/modify the licensing and feature method of the ‘415 patent with the exclusion of license feature components because there is a recognized problem or need in the art including market pressure, design need, etc., and there are a finite number of identified predictable solutions. Accordingly, those in the art could have pursued known solutions with reasonable expectation of success. (KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)). Fundamentally, in the competitive business climate, there is a profit-driven motive to maximize the profitability of goods and services that are provided or marketed to customers. Enterprises typically use business planning to make decisions in order to maximize profits.
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 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patent eligible subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Step 1:
The claims recite a process, system, apparatus, article of manufacture, and/or a nontransitory storage medium with instructions, each of which are proper statutory categories.
Step 2A (prong 1):
Claim 21:
The claim limitations are grouped as shown immediately following:
A method of managing distribution of at least one license to one or more features defined in feature categories using a computing device that includes a processor, comprising: (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
accepting a purchase request, the purchase request specifying a plurality of feature purchases which are included in a plurality of different said feature categories, (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
each feature purchase defining a respective number of purchase feature units and a purchase temporal term for each of said plurality of said feature categories, (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
where a plurality of features units for different features are included within the same feature category, (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
where each of said plurality of different features included within the same feature category share said respective number of purchase features units and said purchase temporal time, and each feature belonging to only one of the feature categories; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
pooling the feature purchases within each feature category to a number of purchase feature credits of a uniform credit temporal term; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
accepting a request for a license, the request specifying a license temporal term, and the request comprising, for each license request feature category: (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
the feature category; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
a number of license feature units; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
computing, for each license request feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license, according to a start date and the license temporal term; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
decrementing the number of purchase feature credits in each feature category according to the number of license feature credits consumed in the feature category; (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
providing the requested license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available in each feature category. (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity - commercial or legal interactions including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations; business relations or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people including following rules or instructions)
Additional dependent claims 22-40 do not appear remedy the deficiency.
Step 2A (prong 2):
Claim 21:
… a computing device
…a processor
These remaining claim limitations are delineated as shown immediately preceding. The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. There are no improvements to the functioning of a computer, other technology or technical field, a particular machine is not cited, nothing is transformed to a different state or thing, the abstract idea is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the abstract idea. The claim merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea, which is generally linked to a particular field of use, in this case, marketing and advertising. Thus, these limitations are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor and memory performing a generic computer function of processing and storing data) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component – MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, receiving data, evaluating data and distributing data are data gathering and data outputting, which has no effect on technology and does no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h).
Step 2B:
The claim limitations do not provide an Inventive Concept. The claim limitations do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more that the abstract idea because the additional elements of the system comprising a computer processor, computer readable storage medium with instructions, and a memory configured to store information, each recited at a high level of generality in a computer network which only perform the universal computer functions of accessing, receiving, storing, and processing data, transmitting and presenting information. Taking the elements both individually and as an ordered combination, the function performed by the computer at each step of the process is purely orthodox. Using a computer to obtain and display data are some of the most basic functions of a computer. As shown, the individual limitations claimed are some of the most rudimentary functions of a computer. The technical solution described in this invention does not alter hardware structure or its routine, does not transform the character of the information being processed, does not identify a novel source or type of data, does not advance the functionality of a computer as a tool, and does not incorporate specific rules enabling the computer to accomplish innovative utilities. In summary, the individual step and/or component does no more than require a general computer to perform standard computer functions. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of a computer devices amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component - requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer, Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1370-71, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1642 (Fed. Cir. 2015);
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 of this title, 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 21-34 and 37-40 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bartfai-Walcott et al. (USPGP 2024/0095315 A1), hereinafter BARTFAI.
Claim 21:
BARTFAI as shown below discloses the following limitations:
method of managing distribution of at least one license to one or more features defined in feature categories using a computing device that includes a processor, comprising: (see at least paragraphs 0202, 0215)
accepting a purchase request, the purchase request specifying a plurality of feature purchases which are included in a plurality of different said feature categories, (see at least paragraphs 0057, 0785, 0215)
each feature purchase defining a respective number of purchase feature units and a purchase temporal term for each of said plurality of said feature categories, (see at least paragraphs 0057, 0785, 0215)
where a plurality of features units for different features are included within the same feature category, (see at least paragraphs 0057, 0785, 0215)
where each of said plurality of different features included within the same feature category share said respective number of purchase features units and said purchase temporal time, and each feature belonging to only one of the feature categories; (see at least paragraphs 0057, 0785, 0215)
pooling the feature purchases within each feature category to a number of purchase feature credits of a uniform credit temporal term; (see at least paragraphs 0086, 0093, 0061)
accepting a request for a license, the request specifying a license temporal term, and the request comprising, (see at least paragraphs 0202, 0222, 0357, 0475)
for each license request feature category: (see at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475)
the feature category; (see at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475)
a number of license feature units; (see at least paragraphs 1024, 1030)
computing, for each license request feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license, according to a start date and the license temporal term; (see at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 1025)
decrementing the number of purchase feature credits in each feature category according to the number of license feature credits consumed in the feature category; (see at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 1025)
providing the requested license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available in each feature category. (see at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 1025)
BARTFAI does not specifically disclose each of the above limitations in a single embodiment. However, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to combine/modify the license purchasing and distribution method of BARTFAI because, “Even if additional, dormant hardware and/or firmware features are included in the shipped semiconductor devices, such dormant features are unable to be activated after the semiconductor devices leave the factory. To gain access to one or more of those dormant features, a customer would need to order, and a manufacturer would need to ship, new versions of the semiconductor devices that have the desired dormant feature(s) activated at the factory. To further complicate matters, the manufacturer may need to predefine and manage numerous different stock keeping units (SKUs) to track the various combinations of different features that are able to be activated on its semiconductor devices, even if some of those combinations are never realized.” (BARTFAI: paragraph 0003). Moreover, each of the elements claimed are all shown by the prior art of record but not combined as claimed. However, the technical ability exists to combine the elements as claimed and the results of the combination are predictable. Therefore, when combined, the elements perform the same function as they did separately. (KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)). Additionally, there is a recognized problem or need in the art including market pressure, design need, etc., and there are a finite number of identified predictable solutions. Consequently, those in the art could have pursued known solutions with reasonable expectation of success. (KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)). In the competitive business climate, there is a profit-driven motive to maximize the profitability of goods and services that are provided or marketed to customers. Enterprises typically use business planning to make decisions in order to maximize profits.
Claims 22-24:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
wherein the requested license expires after the license temporal term for all feature categories.
wherein: the purchase temporal term of each feature purchase differs from at least one of other temporal terms of a same feature purchase.
wherein: the purchase temporal term of a feature purchase of a first feature differs from the purchase temporal term of another feature purchase of a second feature.
See at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 1025.
Claim 25:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
accepting a request for an upgrade to the license at an upgrade time, the upgrade request specifying, for each feature category:
the feature category;
and a number of upgrade license feature units;
recomputing, for each feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license and the request for the upgrade to the license according to the upgrade time and the license temporal term;
decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
providing the requested upgraded license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available.
See at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 0810, 1025, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 26:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
accepting a request to extend the license temporal term at an extension time, the extension request specifying an extension temporal term;
recomputing, for each feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the extension temporal term;
decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
providing the requested extended license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available.
See at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 27:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
accepting a request to upgrade and extend the license, the upgrade and extend request specifying, for each feature category:
the feature category;
a number of upgrade license feature units; and an extension temporal term;
recomputing, for each feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license and the request to upgrade and extend the license according to an upgrade time and the license temporal term, and the extension temporal term;
decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
providing the requested upgraded license and extension if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available.
See at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 28:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
accepting a request to downgrade and extend the license, the downgrade and extend request specifying, for each feature category:
the feature category;
a number of downgrade license feature units;
an extension temporal term;
recomputing, for each feature category, a number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license and the request to downgrade and extend the license according to a downgrade time and the license temporal term, and the extension temporal term;
decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
providing the requested downgraded and extended license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available.
See at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 29:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses incrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed. See at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 30:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
wherein: each purchase temporal term is one of a limited set of purchase temporal terms;
the purchase temporal term of a feature purchase of any of the feature categories must be an offered temporal term of another feature purchase of another feature for a request for a license;
the feature purchases are pooled according to a combination of purchase temporal term and feature category;
wherein the number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license is computed for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination;
wherein the number of license feature credits are decremented in each feature category and purchase temporal term combination according to the number of license feature credits consumed in the feature category and purchase temporal term combination.
See at least paragraphs 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0385, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1324, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 31:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
wherein:
accepting a request for an upgrade to the license at an upgrade time, the upgrade request specifying, for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination:
the feature category purchase and temporal term combination;
a number of upgrade license feature units;
recomputing, for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination, a number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license and the request for an upgrade to the license according to the upgrade time and the license temporal term;
determining if the upgrade time is within a grace period;
if the upgrade time is within the grace period:
providing the requested upgraded license without decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category and purchase temporal term combination;
if the upgrade time is not within the grace period:
decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category and purchase temporal term combination according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
providing the requested upgraded license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available.
See at least paragraphs 0160, 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0385, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1324, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 32:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
accepting a request to extend the license temporal term at an extension time, the extension request specifying an extension temporal term;
recomputing, for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination, the license feature credits consumed by the request for the extension temporal term, wherein the extension temporal term is constrained to one of the purchase temporal terms;
decrementing, the number of license feature credits in each feature category and purchase temporal term combination according to the recomputed number of feature license credits consumed;
providing the requested extended license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available.
See at least paragraphs 0160, 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0385, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1324, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 33:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
accepting a request to upgrade and extend the license, the upgrade and extend request specifying, for each feature category:
the feature category and purchase temporal term combination;
a number of upgrade license feature units;
an extension temporal term for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination, the extension temporal term constrained to one of the purchase temporal terms;
recomputing, for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination, the number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license and the request to upgrade and extend the license according to an upgrade time, and the license temporal term, and the extension temporal term;
decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category and temporal term combination according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
determining if the upgrade time is within a grace period;
if the upgrade time is within the grace period:
providing the upgraded and extended license, wherein the upgraded and extended license:
upgrades the provided license without decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category and purchase temporal term combination;
extends the provided license after decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category and temporal term combination according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
See at least paragraphs 0160, 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0385, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1324, 1371, and 1469.
Claim 34:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses:
accepting a request to downgrade and extend the license, the downgrade and extend request specifying, for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination:
the feature category and purchase temporal term combination;
a number of downgrade license feature units;
an extension temporal term for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination:
recomputing, for each feature category and purchase temporal term combination, the number of license feature credits consumed by the request for the license and the request to downgrade and extend the license according to a downgrade time, and the license temporal term, and the extension temporal term;
decrementing the number of license feature credits in each feature category and purchase temporal term combination according to the recomputed number of license feature credits consumed;
providing the requested downgraded and extended license if a sufficient number of license feature credits are available.
See at least paragraphs 0160, 0202, 0215, 0222, 0357, 0385, 0475, 0810, 0836, 1025, 1324, 1371, and 1469.
Claims 37-40:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections of the claims above. The Examiner finds that remaining claims 17-20 are not patentably distinct from claims 1-14, because the inventions in the claims are directed to related, indistinct products. The related inventions would be distinct if: (1) the inventions as claimed were either not capable of use together or could have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect; (2) the inventions did not overlap in scope, i.e., are mutually exclusive; and (3) the inventions as claimed were not obvious variants. See MPEP § 806.05(j). Furthermore, the inventions as claimed encompass overlapping subject matter and are obvious variants that do not produce any new, meaningful, synergetic result that would render the claims novel. Therefore, for the sake of clarity, the Examiner has grouped the rejections of claims 1-14 and 17-20 accordingly using the same references and citations as above.
Claims 35 and 36 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BARTFAI and further in view of Examiner’s OFFICIAL NOTICE.
Claims 35, 36:
BARTFAI discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. BARTFAI further discloses refunds. See at least paragraphs 0164-0167. BARTFAI does not specifically disclose:
wherein:
the recomputing provides no refund of license feature credits for downgraded license feature
wherein:
the recomputing provides a refund of license feature credits for downgraded license feature units.
However, the Examiner takes OFFICIAL NOTICE that it is old and well known in the commerce community to offer refunds under certain circumstances. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to combine/modify the method of BARTFAI with the refund technique because there is a recognized problem or need in the art including market pressure, design need, etc., and there are a finite number of identified predictable solutions. Consequently, those in the art could have pursued known solutions with reasonable expectation of success. (KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)). Additionally, there is a recognized problem or need in the art including market pressure, design need, etc., and there are a finite number of identified predictable solutions. Consequently, those in the art could have pursued known solutions with reasonable expectation of success. (KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007)). In the competitive business climate, there is a profit-driven motive to maximize the profitability of goods and services that are provided or marketed to customers. Enterprises typically use business planning to make decisions in order to maximize profits.
CONCLUSION
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Non-Patent Literature:
SNOW. “Add License Purchase.” (August 24, 2021). Retrieved online 06/17/2024. https://docs.snowsoftware.com/snow-license-manager/en/UUID-86b2ce58-cf0c-fb3a-6af9-2fb5f84c98b8.html
GENESYS. “PureConnect Licensing Technical Reference.” (22 June 2020). Retrieved online 06/17/2024. https://help.genesys.com/pureconnect/mergedprojects/wh_tr/desktop/pdfs/licensing_tr.pdf
PAPERCUT. “PaperCut's Upgrade Policy.” (04 September 2007). Retrieved online 06/17/2024. https://www.papercut.com/kb/Main/UpgradePolicy/
Foreign Art:
UEMURA et al. “License Distribution Management Server, License Reissue Device And Storefront Server For Selling Licenses.” (EP 1439450 A2)
TAKAHASHI et al. “SOFTWARE LICENSE MANAGING DEVICE AND METHOD, AND PROGRAM RECORDING MEDIUM FOR MANAGING SOFTWARE LICENSE.” (JP 2001/222424 A)
LEBOURGEOIS. “DIGITAL PRODUCT RIGHTS MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUE.” (WO 9842098 A1)
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to James A. Reagan (james.reagan@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is 571.272.6710. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 9 AM to 5 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, John Hayes, can be reached at 571.272.6708.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair . Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free).
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
PO Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
or faxed to 571-273-8300.
Hand delivered responses should be brought to the United States Patent and Trademark Office Customer Service Window:
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314.
/JAMES A REAGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
james.reagan@uspto.gov
571.272.6710 (Office)
571.273.6710 (Desktop Fax)