DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in response to application 19/254,770 filed on 6/30/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
3. 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 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,386,842. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations in bold are the same the differences would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art. For example, the instant invention claims a financing object while US 12, 386,842 claims an entity object however a financing object is obviously a particular instantiation of an entity object.
19/254,770 US 12,386,842
1. A computing system for generating components to be depicted via a computer screen, comprising: at least one processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor; and a memory device storing executable code that, when executed, causes the at least one processor to: receive, via a user’s authenticated user account accessible via a digital platform, at least one control signal representing a user interface input provided via an actionable graphical user interface input component depicted via a graphical user interface of the computer screen, wherein the user interface input indicates the user’s need for a financing object accessible via an entity, wherein the financing object is to be personalized for the user; access stored user data of the user, wherein the stored user data is stored to one or more data storage locations, the stored user data comprising both attribute data associated with the user and account balance data associated with an account currently possessed by the user, the account balance data including a number of expenditures per month; perform data analysis on a plurality of financing objects each having a plurality of object attributes, wherein the data analysis comprises (i) evaluating the plurality of object attributes relative the stored user data, (ii) identifying a plurality of financing objects that are available to the user based on the user data and the plurality of object attributes, and (iii) ranking the plurality of financing objects; and generate and initiate displaying, via the graphical user interface, interactive user interface input components associated with financing object content, the financing object content comprising a selection of ranked financing objects that are available to the user, the selection of ranked financing objects comprising at least two financing objects of the plurality of financing objects that received a relatively highest ranking when performing the data analysis, wherein the financing object content is displayed to include a layout in which a highest ranked financing object of the at least two financing objects is featured, wherein the financing object content depicts respective object attributes of each of the at least two financing objects, wherein the interactive user interface input components include a respective requirements input for each of the at least two financing objects, wherein the respective requirements input is configured to facilitate, based on the user selecting the respective requirements input, accessing requirements that must be satisfied by the user in order to obtain the financing object.
1. A computing system for generating actionable graphical user interface input components to be depicted via a computer screen, comprising: at least one processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor; and a memory device storing executable code that, when executed, causes the at least one processor to: receive, via a user's authenticated user account accessible via a digital platform, at least one control signal representing a user interface input provided via an actionable graphical user interface input component depicted via a graphical user interface of the computer screen, wherein the user interface input indicates the user's need for an entity object accessible via an entity, wherein the entity object is to be personalized for the user; access stored user data of the user, wherein the stored user data is stored to one or more data storage locations, the stored user data comprising both attribute data associated with the user and resource data associated with a resource currently possessed by the user; perform data analysis on a plurality of entity objects each having a plurality of object attributes, wherein the data analysis comprises (i) evaluating the plurality of object attributes relative the stored user data, (ii) identifying a plurality of entity objects that are available to the user based on the user data and the plurality of object attributes, and (iii) ranking the plurality of entity objects; and generate and initiate displaying, via the graphical user interface, interactive user interface input components associated with entity object content, the entity object content comprising a selection of ranked entity objects that are available to the user, the selection of ranked entity objects comprising at least two entity objects of the plurality of entity objects that received a relatively highest ranking when performing the data analysis, wherein the entity object content is displayed to include a layout in which a highest ranked entity object of the at least two entity objects is featured, wherein the entity object content depicts respective object attributes of each of the at least two entity objects, and wherein the layout comprises a differentiated background color associated with the highest ranked entity object, the differentiated background color being a different background color than a respective background color of one or more other entity objects of the at least two entity objects.
2. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the respective object attributes are selected from the group consisting of a financing object quantity, a financing object term, a financing object rate, a financing object fee, an increment remittance amount, and an estimated time period for obtaining the financing object.
2. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the respective object attributes are selected from the group consisting of an entity object quantity, an entity object term, an entity object rate, an entity object fee, an increment remittance amount, and an estimated time period for obtaining the entity object.
3. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the interactive user interface components include a respective customization input for each of the at least two financing objects, wherein the respective customization input is configured to facilitate, based on the user selecting the respective customization input, permitting the user to request a modification of an attribute of the plurality of object attributes of the financing object.
3. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the interactive user interface components include a respective requirements input for each of the at least two entity objects, wherein the respective requirements input is configured to facilitate, based on the user selecting the respective requirements input, accessing requirements that must be satisfied by the user in order to obtain the entity object.
(permitting the user to request a modification of an attribute of the plurality of object attributes of the entity object.) (from claim 4)
4. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the interactive user interface components include an options input configured to display, based on the user selecting the options input, at least one additional financing object other than the at least two financing objects.
5. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the interactive user interface components include an options input configured to display, based on the user selecting the options input, at least one additional entity object other than the at least two entity objects.
5. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to: determine that the user has performed, via the graphical user interface of the computer screen, an authentication process to access, via the digital platform, the user account, wherein the digital platform is managed by the entity, wherein the user account is associated with one or more existing financing objects serviced by the entity and attributed to the user; and provide, via the graphical user interface and based on the user performing the authentication process, access to a plurality of account functionalities associated with the user account; wherein the providing includes displaying, via the graphical user interface, the actionable graphical user interface input component.
6. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to: determine that the user has performed, via the graphical user interface of the computer screen, an authentication process to access, via the digital platform, the user account, wherein the digital platform is managed by the entity, wherein the user account is associated with one or more existing entity objects serviced by the entity and attributed to the user; and provide, via the graphical user interface and based on the user performing the authentication process, access to a plurality of account functionalities associated with the user account; wherein the providing includes displaying, via the graphical user interface, the actionable graphical user interface input component.
6. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the identifying the plurality of financing objects that are available to the user based on the user data and the plurality of object attributes is further based on determining that the user passes a risk grade, wherein the risk grade is based at least in part on a score attributed to the user data that represents a history of user actions.
7. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the identifying the plurality of entity objects that are available to the user based on the user data and the plurality of object attributes is further based on determining that the user passes a risk grade, wherein the risk grade is based at least in part on a score attributed to the user data that represents a history of user actions.
7. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to: receive, via a user device associated with the computer screen, a user input of an interface component of the interactive user interface input components, the user input indicating selection of a selected financing object from the at least two financing objects; based on receiving the user input, populate an application form to apply for the selected financing object; receive a confirmation input to process application data included in the application form; and transmit an electronic notification to one or more electronic devices to facilitate verification of the application data included in the application form.
8. The computing system of claim 1, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to: receive, via a user device associated with the computer screen, a user input of an interface component of the interactive user interface input components, the user input indicating selection of a selected entity object from the at least two entity objects; based on receiving the user input, populate an application form to apply for the selected entity object; receive a confirmation input to process application data included in the application form; and transmit an electronic notification to one or more electronic devices to facilitate verification of the application data included in the application form.
8. The computing system of claim 7, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to initiate notification, via an electronic message, of an outcome of the verification of the application data, the initiating including transmitting the electronic message to the user device.
9. The computing system of claim 8, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to initiate notification, via an electronic message, of an outcome of the verification of the application data, the initiating including transmitting the electronic message to the user device.
9. The computing system of claim 8, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to receive an encrypted digital authentication validating the user's identity.
10. The computing system of claim 9, wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to receive an encrypted digital authentication validating the user's identity.
Claims 10-15 are non-transitory computer readable claims substantially corresponding to the system of claims 1-6 and are thus rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claims 1-6.
Claims 16-20 are method claims substantially corresponding to the system of claims 1-5 and are thus rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claims 1-5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0059352 (hereinafter Chandran) in view of US 2013/0312087 (hereinafter Latzina).
As for claim 1 Chandran teaches a computing system (ranking device 100, at figure 1, and paragraph 22) generating components to be depicted via a computer screen (elements 510, 520, 610, 620, 710, 720, 812, 814, 816, at figures 5-8), comprising:
at least one processor (see figure 1, and paragraph 24, which describes a “central processing unit ("CPU") 105, which may include a conventional microprocessor”);
a communication interface (see figure 1, and paragraph 27, which describes that “I/O devices and interfaces 110 provide a communication interface to various external devices”) communicatively coupled to the at least one processor (see figure 1); and
a memory device (see figure 1, and paragraph 24, which describes “memory 130, such as random access memory ("RAM") for temporary storage of information and a read only memory ("ROM") for permanent storage of information, and a mass storage device 120, such as a hard drive, diskette, or optical media storage device”) storing executable code that, when executed, causes the at least one processor (see paragraph 29, which describes that the “ranking device 100 also includes three application modules that may be executed by the CPU ”) to:
(see block 210, at figure 2, and paragraph 31, which describes that the “prescreen module 130 (FIG. 1) of the ranking device 100 receives, or otherwise accesses, information regarding a potential borrower”) access stored user data of the user, wherein the stored user data is stored to one or more data storage locations, (see paragraph 31, which describes “credit card offers”; Note: The specification, at paragraph 68, provides examples of an “entity object”- “entity object (e.g., a credit card, a personal loan, an auto loan, a business loan, a mortgage loan, a term loan, a home-equity loan, a student loan, a credit-builder loan, a payday loan, a debt consolidation loan, etc.)”. The specification, at paragraph 35, describes that the “user 110 can be any individual, a group, entity, etc. that is in possession of or has access to the user device 104, 106”. The broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification of an “entity object” includes anything of, related to, or associated with an individual, organization, or group, and includes any of the listed examples at paragraph 68), the stored user data (see paragraph 31, which describes “borrower information”) comprising both attribute data associated with the user and account balance data associated with an account currently possessed by the user, the account balance data including a number of expenditures per month; (see paragraph 40, which describes “[o]ther attributes that may be considered in the prescreen process may include, for example, historical click-through-rate for an offer, historical conversion rate for an offer, geographic location of the borrower, special interests of the borrower, modeled overall click propensity for the borrower, the time of day and/or day of week that the prescreening is requested, and promised or desired display rates for an offer”, with details of the attributes provided at paragraphs 41-48);
perform data analysis on a plurality of financing objects each having a plurality of object attributes, wherein the data analysis, comprises (i) evaluating the plurality of object attributes relative the stored user data, (ii) identifying a plurality of financing objects that are available to the user based on the user data and the plurality of object attributes, and (iii) ranking the plurality of financing objects; (see block 220, at figure 2, and paragraph 32, which describes that the “prescreen process accesses credit related data regarding the borrower and/or lender criteria associated with each of a plurality of credit card offers in order to determine one or more credit card offers that the borrower would likely be eligible for” and block 230, at figure 2, and paragraph 33, which describes “the prescreened offers are received by the prescreen module 130, such as from the prescreen device 162. Alternatively, in an embodiment where the prescreen module 130 performs the prescreen process, in block 230 the prescreen module 130 completes the prescreen process and makes the prescreened offers available to other modules of the ranking device 100”)
generate and initiate displaying, (see block 250, at figure 2, and paragraph 35, which describes that the “presentation module 170 generates a presentation interface, such as one or more HTML pages, for example, that includes indications of one or more of the ranked credit card offers”), via the graphical user interface (see figures 5-8) interactive user interface input components (elements 510, 520, 610, 620, 710, 720, 812, 814, 816, at figures 5-8) associated with financing object content, the financing object content comprising a selection of ranked financing objects (“credit card offers”) that are available to the user (“customer” or “borrower”) the selection of ranked financing objects comprising at least two financing objects of the plurality of financing objects that received a relatively highest ranking when performing the data analysis (see figure 8, and paragraph 66, which describes that the “offer 820 is associate with a second highest ranked prescreened offer, and the offer 830 is associated with a third-highest prescreened offer”), wherein the financing object content is displayed to include a layout in which a highest ranked financing object of the at least two financing objects is featured (prescreened offer 810, at figure 8), wherein the financing object content depicts respective object attributes of each of the at least two financing objects, (see paragraph 34, which describes that the “attributes used by the ranking module 150, and the relative weightings assigned to each of the used attributes, are determined by the ranking entity and/or by a third party referrer that presents the ranked prescreened offers to the borrower”; see blocks 310,320, at figure 3, paragraph 38, which describes “the ranking module 150 may determine weightings that should be assigned to attributes, if any. In one embodiment, attribute weightings are determined based on ranking criteria from the referring entity, such as a third party transmitting borrower data from the third party data source 166, ranking criteria from the prescreen device 162, and/or ranking criteria established by the ranking entity”, and paragraph 50, which describes “in block 330, the prescreened offers assigned ranks based on their respective expected values”);
wherein the interactive user interface input components include a respective requirements input for each of the at least two financing objects (links 510, 520, 610, 620, 710, 720, start buttons 812, 814, 816, at figures 5-8), wherein the respective requirements input is configured to facilitate, based on the user selecting the respective requirements input, accessing requirements that must be satisfied by the user in order to obtain the financing object (see block 240, at figure 2, and paragraph 34, which describes that “information regarding the prescreened offers is accessed by the ranking module 150. As described in further detail below with reference to FIG. 3, for example, the ranking module 150 ranks the prescreened offers according to one or more attributes. The attributes may be borrower attributes, attributes associated with particular prescreened offers, credit card issuer attributes, and/or other relevant attributes. In one embodiment, the attributes used by the ranking module 150, and the relative weightings assigned to each of the used attributes, are determined by the ranking entity and/or by a third party referrer that presents the ranked prescreened offers to the borrower”; see block 330, at figure 3, and paragraph 50, which describes “in block 330, the prescreened offers assigned ranks based on their respective expected values”).
Chandran however does not explicitly disclose: receive, via a user’s authenticated user account accessible via a digital platform, at least one control signal representing a user interface input provided via an actionable graphical user interface input component depicted via a graphical user interface of the computer screen wherein the user interface input indicates the user’s need for a financing object accessible via an entity, wherein the financing object is to be personalized for the user. Latzina however discloses: receive, via a user’s authenticated user account accessible via a digital platform, at least one control signal representing a user interface input provided via an actionable graphical user interface input component depicted via a graphical user interface of the computer screen (see paragraph 0038, which describes that users are authenticated and presented with an actionable input that allows the users to request object-entities), wherein the user interface input indicates the user’s need for a financing object accessible via an entity (See paragraphs 0023, 0038, and 0047 which describes that the users input string is also used to indicate the need to access the object-entity) , wherein the financing object is to be personalized for the user (See paragraphs 0003, and which describe that users once authenticated are able to manipulate and personalize the previously concealed object-entity). It would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the pertinent at the time the instantly claimed invention was filed to have incorporated the teaching of Latzina into the system of Chandran. The modification would have been obvious because the two references are concerned with the solution to problem of accessing and manipulating/editing objects (see Latzina and Chandran abstract), therefore there is an implicit motivation to combine these references (i.e. motivation from the references themselves). In other words, the ordinary skilled artisan, during his/her quest for a solution to the cited problem, would look to the cited references at the time the invention was made. Consequently, the ordinary skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine the cited references since Latzina’s teaching would enable users of the Chandran system to have more efficient processing.
As for claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further Chandran teaches that wherein the respective object attributes are selected from the group consisting of a financing object quantity, a financing object term, a financing object rate, a financing object fee, an increment remittance amount, and an estimated time period for obtaining the financing object. (see figures 5-8, which show associated object attributes that include “interest rate”, “intro rate”, “grace period”, “credit limit”, “annual fee”, and “our overview” for the credit card offers).
As for claim 5 the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further Latzina discloses: wherein the executable code, when executed, further causes the at least one processor to: determine that the user has performed, via the graphical user interface of the computer screen, an authentication process to access, via the digital platform, the user account (see paragraph 0038, which describes that users are authenticated and presented with an actionable input that allows the users to request object-entities), wherein the digital platform is managed by the entity, wherein the user account is associated with one or more existing financing objects serviced by the entity and attributed to the user (see paragraph 0020 note the user account is authenticated and the system determines what level of privileges there should be with respect to the requested objects); and provide, via the graphical user interface and based on the user performing the authentication process, access to a plurality of account functionalities associated with the user account (See paragraphs 0020, stating that depending on the user different functionalities will be available such as read/write/edit/copy etc.);; wherein the providing includes displaying, via the graphical user interface, the actionable graphical user interface input component (See paragraphs 0023, 0038, and 0047 which describes that the users input string is also used to indicate the need to access the object-entity).
Claims 10, 11 and 14 are non-transitory computer readable claims substantially corresponding to the system of claims 1, 2 and 5 and are thus rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claims 1, 2 and 5.
Claims 16, 17 and 20 are method claims substantially corresponding to the system of claims 1, 2 and 5 and are thus rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claims 1, 2 and 5.
Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIYAH STONE HARPER whose telephone number is (571)272-0759. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached on (571) 272-4098. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Eliyah S. Harper/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166 July 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights