DETAILED ACTION
Amendment received on December 23, 2025 has been acknowledged. Claims 1 and 11 have been amended and entered. Therefore, claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 23, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues: “Because the claims are eligible at Step 2A, Prong Two, no analysis under Step 2B is required. Nevertheless, Applicant notes that the amended claims further recite non-generic and non-conventional interaction behavior, including coordinated multi-user subset selection and per- user payment via a shared group cart interface, which provides additional support for eligibility.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Example 37, is directed toward a GUI that is capable of arranging icons on a user device based on the amount of use over a period of time. The only similarity between the instant claims and Example 37 are the graphical user interfaces.
Under Step 2A (prong 2), the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. The Examiner acknowledges that representative claim 1 does recite additional elements, a first and second graphical user interface, a database and an electronic device of a manager or staff.
Although reciting these additional elements, taken alone or in combination these elements are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. This is because the additional elements of claim 1 are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as generic computing hardware) such that they amount to nothing more than the mere instructions to implement or apply the abstract idea on generic computing hardware (or, merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea). Further, the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (such as the Internet or computing networks).
Secondly, the additional elements are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the claim fails to (i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, (ii) implement the judicial exception with, or use the judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, (iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or (iv) applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. In addition to the above, displaying a group cart user interface and receiving a selection for pre-ordered food represent little more than extra-solution activity (e.g. data gathering or outputting) that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (see: MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Furthermore the claims fail to recite the technical underpinnings that provide eligibility as described in claim 1 of Example 37. For example, the claims would need to recite that the orders within the group cart are arranged based on the time each individual entered and submitted payment for each order within the group cart. This ordered combination would resemble Example 37 and would be a reasonable argument against the 101 rejection.
However, the instant claims recite a process that fails to integrate the combination into a practical application.
Applicant argues: “As amended, claim 1 is not taught or suggested by the Posch and Li, either alone or in combination. While Posch describes systems for facilitating reservations and menu interactions, and Li describes payment and reservation-related functionality, neither reference, alone or in combination, discloses or suggests a group cart user interface that enables multiple users to independently select subsets of pre-ordered food and submit separate payments via the same group cart. The cited references instead contemplate conventional ordering and payment flows involving a single user or a single transaction, and do not teach or suggest the claimed per-user subset selection and per-user payment within a shared group cart context.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The specification ¶ [0066] states:
individual users from the group may select a subset of pre-ordered food and pay for whatever items of the pre-ordered food that the would like to pay.
The cited portion of the specification fails to provide technical support that each individual user is utilizing a separate device to provide the order and payment. One of ordinary skill within the art would recognize that each order can be input via by one user on one device for the entire group.
Recently discovered prior art to Stolts et al., has been provided to teach the amended claim limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim(s) recite(s) verify credentials of a user and access user preferences;
access a geographic location of the user;
access a plurality of restaurants based on the user preferences and at least one of a geographic proximity of the user or a prior selection of the user;
display at least some of the restaurants of the plurality of restaurants on a first graphical user interface;
receive a selection of a restaurant of the plurality of restaurants by a first touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface;
access, from a database, a menu from the selected restaurant of the plurality of restaurants;
display a subset of a plurality of menu items based on a category;
receive, as an order, a selection of at least one menu item of the subset of the plurality of menu items for inclusion in a group cart, by a second touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface;
display a group cart user interface, corresponding to the group cart, that provides a list of pre-ordered food for a group of users associated with the group cart, wherein the group of users includes the user;
receive, from each user associated with the group cart, (i) a selection of a subset of the pre-ordered food and (ii) payment, via the group cart user interface, for the selected subset, and,
transmit, to a second graphical user interface configured for use on an electronic device of a restaurant manager or staff which tracks tables and provides an interaction with users, the order.
The steps of the method, as drafted, provide a process that, under its broadest reasonable
interpretation, covers commercial interactions such as sales activities or a business relationship between a user reserving a table and pre-ordering food from a menu of a selected restaurant.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers sales activities or a business relationship, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites an additional element of an electronic device of a restaurant manager. The electronic device of the manager is recited at a high level of generality of a generic computing device for sending and receiving data. As such, there is nothing recited that can be considered a practical application or significantly more than the judicial exception.
To the extent that displaying may be interpreted as an additional element (if interpreted as a
display monitor or screen), then this additional element would also fail to integrate the abstract idea
into a practical application. If the displaying step is interpreted to include a computer monitor or
screen, then this is recited at a high‐level of generality (i.e., as a generic device performing a generic
function of displaying) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception
using a generic computer component.
Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical
application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Similarly, a
computer monitor or screen would not be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial
exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical
application, the additional element of a display (such as a computer screen) amounts to no more than
mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to
apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
The claim is patent ineligible.
A similar analysis should have been applied to claim 11 which recites essentially the same
abstract idea as in claim 1. As stated previously, the electronic device of a restaurant manager are recited at a high‐level of generality (i.e., as a generic processors performing a generic computer functions) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Similarly, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. When considering the claim
as a whole, the claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 2 and 12 recite storing data within a database, which is recited at a high‐level of generality (i.e., as a generic processors performing a generic computer functions) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Claims 3 and 13 recite a natural language model and a machine learning network, are also recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Claims 4-11 and 14-20 also are patent ineligible. For example claims 4-5 and 14-15 further describe the abstract idea by displaying a map of tables, receiving a selection of a table, sending a selection and providing a confirmation of the reserved table. Claims 6-10 and 16-20 further describe the abstract idea with limitations directed to providing recommendations, describing the location of the restaurant, providing geolocation of the user, displaying prompts to a user and setting a price to occupy a table.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 10-13, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Posch WIPO WO 2021/222975 in view of Li, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0364836 further in view of Stolts, II et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0224697, hereinafter Stolts.
As per Claim 1, Posch discloses a system for streamlined restaurant turnover, comprising:
a processor (pg.4, ¶ [0011] discusses one or more processors); and
a memory, including instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by the processor (pg.8, ¶ [0027] discusses a computer-readable medium having a plurality of instructions executable by a one or more processors), cause the system to:
verify credentials of a user and access user preferences (pg.14, ¶ [0043] discusses user (130) accesses the system application through an application registration interface and creates their user profile by registering as a user and entering details including their username and password, preferred email address and telephone number… food/beverage preferences or dietary requirements/limitations);
access a plurality of restaurants based on the user preferences and at least one of a geographic proximity of the user or a prior selection of the user (pg.14, ¶ [0044] discusses User (130) is able to conduct a search of participating (registered) dining establishments of interest by entering relevant key words including, for example, type of dining cuisine (e.g., Italian, fine dining, Mexican, pub), price, ability to cater for food preferences/limitations (e.g., vegan, gluten free), preferred location, or the names of one or more preferred dining establishments);
display at least some of the restaurants of the plurality of restaurants on a first graphical user interface (pg.14, ¶ [0044] discusses the search reveals three dining establishments (185a, 185b and 185c) that match the search criteria entered by user (130) using search interface (180));
receive a selection of a restaurant of the plurality of restaurants by a first touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface (pg.14, ¶ [0044] discusses User (130) can select any of the matched dining establishments (185a, 185b and 185c) and with the use of restaurant selection interface (190), view details including type of cuisine, location, customer reviews, photographs and menu(s) for each of the matched restaurants);
access, from a database, a menu from the selected restaurant of the plurality of restaurants (Figure 1, Segment 600 depicts Menu Interface 260, pg.13, ¶ [0042] discusses providing a database (60) for storing menu items available for order and purchase at each registered dining establishment);
display a subset of a plurality of menu items based on a category (pgs.15-16, ¶ [0046] discusses the personalized menu contains a subset menu (i.e., a compliant list of menu items) that is generated based upon a comparison of the user's (130) personal information entered and stored within central server (20) and the available list of menu items);
receive, as an order, a selection of at least one menu item of the subset of the plurality of menu items, by a second touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface (pg.16, ¶ [0048] discusses user (130) placing their order using order interface (270) by selecting their desired menu items); and
transmit the order (Figure 1, Segment 700 depicts how users order and pay for their meals, by transmitting selections to serving staff 320),.
However, Posch fails to explicitly state access a geographic location of the user;
access a plurality of restaurants based on the user preferences and at least one of a geographic proximity of the user or a prior selection of the user
to a second graphical user interface configured for use on an electronic device of a restaurant manager or staff which tracks tables and provides an interaction with users.
Li teaches access a geographic location of the user (pg.4, ¶ [0059] discusses users/customers will be able to use the system on a mobile phone or smart tablet to search, via a GPS system, for restaurants that are near them and that (i) use the system and/or (ii) are still open for business or open for dine-in or delivery);
access a plurality of restaurants based on the user preferences and at least one of a geographic proximity of the user or a prior selection of the user (pg.4, ¶ [0059] discusses the user/customer can set a certain distance (e.g., X mile radius) to observe which restaurants/hosts are near them);
to a second graphical user interface configured for use on an electronic device of a restaurant manager or staff which tracks tables and provides an interaction with users (pg.4, ¶ [0061] discusses the first host app 102 can be a tablet device, computer, smartphone, computing device or similar device installed with the application using the system to manage reservations used by a host or restaurant).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to access a location of a user and for the restaurant to receive data managing customer reservation as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to receive a customer’s order and location using an in-house device to a reservation and pre-ordering system with the predicted result of receiving remote orders from customers as needed in Posch.
Posch teaches a system and method for facilitating online reservations. pg.1, ¶ [0001]
Li teaches systems and methods for managing reservations. Abstract
However, the Posch-Li combination fails to disclose receive, as an order, a selection of at least one menu item of the subset of the plurality of menu items for inclusion in a group cart;
display a group cart user interface, corresponding to the group cart, that provides a list of pre-ordered food for a group of users associated with the group cart, wherein the group of users includes the user;
receive, from each user associated with the group cart, (i) a selection of a subset of the pre-ordered food and (ii) payment, via the group cart user interface, for the selected subset.
Stolts teaches receive, as an order, a selection of at least one menu item of the subset of the plurality of menu items for inclusion in a group cart (pg.8, ¶ [0088] discusses the application or system may allow the user to schedule events for small or large parties (e.g., 2 people, 10 people, 50 people, etc.) for a specific time and date, as well as take individual orders for each user or member of the party…users may have the option of requesting separate checks, or splitting the check by the number of people on the table, etc., via the application);
display a group cart user interface, corresponding to the group cart, that provides a list of pre-ordered food for a group of users associated with the group cart, wherein the group of users includes the user (Figure 5, Screen 500, depicts My Table 510 with order 511-a for Guest 1, order 511-b for Guest 2, order 511-c for Guest 3, order 511-d for Guest 4);
receive, from each user associated with the group cart, (i) a selection of a subset of the pre-ordered food and (ii) payment, via the group cart user interface, for the selected subset (pg.9, ¶ [0092] discusses the system may also allow the order to be split up amongst multiple users (e.g., based on the individual orders or split the check equally).
As per Claim 2, Posch discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
store data within a database for use in providing recommendations (pg.13, ¶ [0042] discusses Database (30) includes user account details in addition to any other information entered by each individual registered user including, but not limited to, their medical condition(s), allergie(s), food and/or beverage preference(s), dietary requirement(s)/limitation(s) and dietary intolerance(s)).
Posch teaches the claimed invention, however, Posch fails to disclose store data gathered during the user dining experiences.
Li teaches store data gathered during the user dining experiences (pg.5, ¶ [0066] discusses where the user can rate their experience during the reservation by a system e.g. on a scale out of 5 stars, or a status indicator reflecting that the user has never checked into a host).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to receive a customer’s rated restaurant experience as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to receive a customer’s restaurant rating with the predicted result of receiving a customer’s rating as needed in Posch.
As per Claim 3, Posch discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
parse, by a natural language model, the user data (pg.15, ¶ [0046] discusses using artificial intelligence techniques and/or natural language processing, the user's personal information stored in database (30) with the available menu items stored in database (60), and will notify the user which items contain gluten); and
predict, by a machine learning network, one or more recommendations based on the parsed user data (pg.15, ¶ [0046] discusses automatically suggest alternative gluten-free options available on the menu for selection by user).
However, Posch fails to disclose a user dining experiences.
Li teaches a user dining experiences (pg.6, ¶ [0068] discusses The host rating 216 is a rating given on a scale (e.g., out of 5 stars) given by the user on a previous reservation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to utilize a customer’s rating experience as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a customer’s restaurant rating with the predicted result of using the rating in a machine learning algorithm as needed in Posch.
As per Claim 7, Posch and Li discloses the system of claim 1. However, the Posch-Li combination fails to explicitly state wherein the restaurant is at a sporting event.
Stolts teaches wherein the restaurant is at a sporting event (pg.5, ¶ [0053] discusses events module 136 may be configured to provide at least a portion of the entity for an event based at least in part on the request from the user to the entity. In some cases, the event may be an example of …a sporting event, or an event for people with common interests or tastes).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of reservations before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch-Li combination to include the ability to provide food at a sporting event as taught by Stolts to provide a system and method that can locate an entity using one or more filters, including price, rating, or distance; select at least one of the one or more entity offerings; identify an entity visit time; send a request from a user to the entity; receive an acceptance from the entity to the user; send one or more updates of the entity visit time from the user to the entity; send one or more updates for a status of the entity offerings from the entity to the user; and provide at least a portion the one or more entity offerings at the specified location at or near the entity visit time. Abstract
As per Claim 10, Posch discloses the system of the claimed invention. However, Posch fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
set a price for the order based on the desired duration the user will occupy the table.
Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to: set a price for the order based on the desired duration the user will occupy the table (Figure 8A, depicts a Seat Pricing screen 802, where seat pricing is set for a mealtime and having an Average Turnaround Time 810a of 60 min 810b).
The Examiner is construing that the mealtime selected by a customer for a daypart will be charged for the price designated for a 60 minute duration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to set seat dynamic seat pricing for reservations as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to set table prices for reservations with the predicted result of charging customers for high demand reservations as needed in Posch.
As per Claim 11, Posch discloses a computer-implemented method for streamlined restaurant turnover, comprising:
verifying credentials of a user and accessing user preferences(pg.14, ¶ [0043] discusses user (130) accesses the system application through an application registration interface and creates their user profile by registering as a user and entering details including their username and password, preferred email address and telephone number… food/beverage preferences or dietary requirements/limitations);
accessing a plurality of restaurants based on the user preferences and at least one of a geographic proximity of the user or a prior selection of the user (pg.14, ¶ [0044] discusses User (130) is able to conduct a search of participating (registered) dining establishments of interest by entering relevant key words including, for example, type of dining cuisine (e.g., Italian, fine dining, Mexican, pub), price, ability to cater for food preferences/limitations (e.g., vegan, gluten free), preferred location, or the names of one or more preferred dining establishments);
displaying at least some of the restaurants of the plurality of restaurants on a first graphical user interface (pg.14, ¶ [0044] discusses the search reveals three dining establishments (185a, 185b and 185c) that match the search criteria entered by user (130) using search interface (180));
receiving a selection of a restaurant of the plurality of restaurants by a first touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface (pg.14, ¶ [0044] discusses User (130) can select any of the matched dining establishments (185a, 185b and 185c) and with the use of restaurant selection interface (190), view details including type of cuisine, location, customer reviews, photographs and menu(s) for each of the matched restaurants);
accessing, from a database, a menu from the selected restaurant of the plurality of restaurants (Figure 1, Segment 600 depicts Menu Interface 260, pg.13, ¶ [0042] discusses providing a database (60) for storing menu items available for order and purchase at each registered dining establishment);
displaying a subset of a plurality of menu items based on a category (pgs.15-16, ¶ [0046] discusses the personalized menu contains a subset menu (i.e., a compliant list of menu items) that is generated based upon a comparison of the user's (130) personal information entered and stored within central server (20) and the available list of menu items);
receiving, as an order, a selection of at least one menu item of the subset of the plurality of menu items, by a second touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface (pg.16, ¶ [0048] discusses user (130) placing their order using order interface (270) by selecting their desired menu items); and
transmitting the order (Figure 1, Segment 700 depicts how users order and pay for their meals, by transmitting selections to serving staff 320),.
However, Posch fails to explicitly state access a geographic location of the user;
accessing a plurality of restaurants based on the user preferences and at least one of a geographic proximity of the user or a prior selection of the user
to a second graphical user interface configured for use on an electronic device of a restaurant manager or staff which tracks tables and provides an interaction with users.
Li teaches access a geographic location of the user (pg.4, ¶ [0059] discusses users/customers will be able to use the system on a mobile phone or smart tablet to search, via a GPS system, for restaurants that are near them and that (i) use the system and/or (ii) are still open for business or open for dine-in or delivery);
accessing a plurality of restaurants based on the user preferences and at least one of a geographic proximity of the user or a prior selection of the user (pg.4, ¶ [0059] discusses the user/customer can set a certain distance (e.g., X mile radius) to observe which restaurants/hosts are near them);
to a second graphical user interface configured for use on an electronic device of a restaurant manager or staff which tracks tables and provides an interaction with users (pg.4, ¶ [0061] discusses the first host app 102 can be a tablet device, computer, smartphone, computing device or similar device installed with the application using the system to manage reservations used by a host or restaurant).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to access a location of a user and for the restaurant to receive data managing customer reservation as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to receive a customer’s order and location using an in-house device to a reservation and pre-ordering system with the predicted result of receiving remote orders from customers as needed in Posch.
Posch teaches a system and method for facilitating online reservations. pg.1, ¶ [0001]
Li teaches systems and methods for managing reservations. Abstract
However, the Posch-Li combination fails to disclose receive, as an order, a selection of at least one menu item of the subset of the plurality of menu items for inclusion in a group cart;
display a group cart user interface, corresponding to the group cart, that provides a list of pre-ordered food for a group of users associated with the group cart, wherein the group of users includes the user;
receive, from each user associated with the group cart, (i) a selection of a subset of the pre-ordered food and (ii) payment, via the group cart user interface, for the selected subset.
Stolts teaches receive, as an order, a selection of at least one menu item of the subset of the plurality of menu items for inclusion in a group cart (pg.8, ¶ [0088] discusses the application or system may allow the user to schedule events for small or large parties (e.g., 2 people, 10 people, 50 people, etc.) for a specific time and date, as well as take individual orders for each user or member of the party…users may have the option of requesting separate checks, or splitting the check by the number of people on the table, etc., via the application);
display a group cart user interface, corresponding to the group cart, that provides a list of pre-ordered food for a group of users associated with the group cart, wherein the group of users includes the user (Figure 5, Screen 500, depicts My Table 510 with order 511-a for Guest 1, order 511-b for Guest 2, order 511-c for Guest 3, order 511-d for Guest 4);
receive, from each user associated with the group cart, (i) a selection of a subset of the pre-ordered food and (ii) payment, via the group cart user interface, for the selected subset (pg.9, ¶ [0092] discusses the system may also allow the order to be split up amongst multiple users (e.g., based on the individual orders or split the check equally).
As per Claim 12, Posch discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 11, further comprising:
storing data gathered during the user dining experiences within a database for use in providing recommendations(pg.13, ¶ [0042] discusses Database (30) includes user account details in addition to any other information entered by each individual registered user including, but not limited to, their medical condition(s), allergie(s), food and/or beverage preference(s), dietary requirement(s)/limitation(s) and dietary intolerance(s)).
Posch teaches the claimed invention, however, Posch fails to disclose store data gathered during the user dining experiences.
Li teaches store data gathered during the user dining experiences (pg.5, ¶ [0066] discusses where the user can rate their experience during the reservation by a system e.g. on a scale out of 5 stars, or a status indicator reflecting that the user has never checked into a host).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to receive a customer’s rated restaurant experience as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to receive a customer’s restaurant rating with the predicted result of receiving a customer’s rating as needed in Posch.
As per Claim 13, Posch discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising:
parsing, by a natural language model, the user data (pg.15, ¶ [0046] discusses using artificial intelligence techniques and/or natural language processing, the user's personal information stored in database (30) with the available menu items stored in database (60), and will notify the user which items contain gluten); and
predicting, by a machine learning network, one or more recommendations based on the parsed user data (pg.15, ¶ [0046] discusses automatically suggest alternative gluten-free options available on the menu for selection by user).
However, Posch fails to disclose a user dining experiences.
Li teaches a user dining experiences (pg.6, ¶ [0068] discusses The host rating 216 is a rating given on a scale (e.g., out of 5 stars) given by the user on a previous reservation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to utilize a customer’s rating experience as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a customer’s restaurant rating with the predicted result of using the rating in a machine learning algorithm as needed in Posch.
As per Claim 17, Posch and Li discloses the system of claim 11. However, the Posch-Li combination fails to explicitly state wherein the restaurant is at a sporting event.
Stolts teaches wherein the restaurant is at a sporting event (pg.5, ¶ [0053] discusses events module 136 may be configured to provide at least a portion of the entity for an event based at least in part on the request from the user to the entity. In some cases, the event may be an example of …a sporting event, or an event for people with common interests or tastes).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of reservations before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch-Li combination to include the ability to provide food at a sporting event as taught by Stolts to provide a system and method that can locate an entity using one or more filters, including price, rating, or distance; select at least one of the one or more entity offerings; identify an entity visit time; send a request from a user to the entity; receive an acceptance from the entity to the user; send one or more updates of the entity visit time from the user to the entity; send one or more updates for a status of the entity offerings from the entity to the user; and provide at least a portion the one or more entity offerings at the specified location at or near the entity visit time. Abstract
As per Claim 20, Posch discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 19.
However, Posch fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
set a price for the order based on the desired duration the user will occupy the table.
Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to: set a price for the order based on the desired duration the user will occupy the table (Figure 8A, depicts a Seat Pricing screen 802, where seat pricing is set for a mealtime and having an Average Turnaround Time 810a of 60 min 810b).
The Examiner is construing that the mealtime selected by a customer for a daypart will be charged for the price designated for a 60 minute duration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ability to set seat dynamic seat pricing for reservations as in the improvement discussed in Li in the system executing the method of Posch. As in Li, it is within the capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to set table prices for reservations with the predicted result of charging customers for high demand reservations as needed in Posch.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Posch WIPO WO 2021/222975 in view of Li, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0364836 in view of Stolts, II et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0224697 further in view of Debono et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0100529.
As per Claim 4, Posch discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
display on the first graphical user interface a map of a plurality of tables in a restaurant (pg.15, ¶ [0044] discusses user (130) is then able to view table availability at Romeo's using reservation interface (210) which also allows user (130) to view a representation of the seating/table arrangement (215) within Romeo's); and
receive a selection of a particular table of the plurality of tables by a touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface (pg.15, ¶ [0044] discusses If the user (130) finds an available table with a seating capacity that accommodates their guest(s) at their preferred date and time, the user is then able to make a reservation using reservation interface (210) to reserve their preferred table... Figure 4, depicts the use of a device capable of receiving a touch input).
Posch teaches displaying a map of tables within a restaurant, as described above. Li teaches a system and method capable of communicating the number of available seats and a price for each seat during a specified timeframe.
However, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination fails to disclose display on the first graphical user interface a map of a plurality of tables in a restaurant with an indication of available times and durations for each of the plurality of tables.
Debono et al., teaches display on the first graphical user interface a map of a plurality of tables in a restaurant with an indication of available times and durations for each of the plurality of tables (Figure 8, depicts generating and displaying a map of seats, with time blocks of each seat and the capability of updating the map with the reserved time block).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch, Li and Stolts combination to include the ability to display a seating map having the time period for available seating as taught by Debone et al., to provide a map of the furniture items is then displayed to a user. Selection of a furniture item is received and a reservation record associated with the selected furniture item is updated to indicate that the furniture item is reserved. A selection of an item to purchase may be received by a first computing device from which a furniture is reserved. In response to the selection of the item to purchase, a message may be transmitted to a second computing device to deliver the selected item to the physical position of the furniture item associated with the first computing device. Abstract
As per Claim 5, Posch discloses the system of claim 4. However, Posch fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
transmit, to the second graphical user interface, the selection of the particular table; and
provide an indication confirming the reservation of the selected particular table for a specific time.
Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
transmit, to the second graphical user interface, the selection of the particular table (pg.6, ¶ [0071] discusses the reservation date 308, the reservation time 309 and the reservation guest number 310, which show the date, the time and the number of requested seats for the requested reservation-which can be modified or selected by the user via a pop-up numerical, text and/or scroll-down menu (not shown) that appears when the respective element 308, 309 or 310 is pushed or clicked); and
provide an indication confirming the reservation of the selected particular table for a specific time (Figure 4A, depicts booking confirmation window 402).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary still in the art to include in Posch the ability to display selected seats and provide confirmation to a customer as taught by Li since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
As per Claim 14, Posch discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 11, further comprising:
displaying on the first graphical user interface a map of a plurality of tables in a restaurant with an indication of available times and durations for each of the plurality of tables(pg.15, ¶ [0044] discusses user (130) is then able to view table availability at Romeo's using reservation interface (210) which also allows user (130) to view a representation of the seating/table arrangement (215) within Romeo's); and
receiving a selection of a particular table of the plurality of tables by a touch command of the user on the first graphical user interface (pg.15, ¶ [0044] discusses If the user (130) finds an available table with a seating capacity that accommodates their guest(s) at their preferred date and time, the user is then able to make a reservation using reservation interface (210) to reserve their preferred table... Figure 4, depicts the use of a device capable of receiving a touch input).
Posch teaches displaying a map of tables within a restaurant, as described above. Li teaches a system and method capable of communicating the number of available seats and a price for each seat during a specified timeframe.
However, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination fails to disclose display on the first graphical user interface a map of a plurality of tables in a restaurant with an indication of available times and durations for each of the plurality of tables.
Debono et al., teaches display on the first graphical user interface a map of a plurality of tables in a restaurant with an indication of available times and durations for each of the plurality of tables (Figure 8, depicts generating and displaying a map of seats, with time blocks of each seat and the capability of updating the map with the reserved time block).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch-Li combination to include the ability to display a seating map having the time period for available seating as taught by Debone et al., to provide a map of the furniture items is then displayed to a user. Selection of a furniture item is received and a reservation record associated with the selected furniture item is updated to indicate that the furniture item is reserved. A selection of an item to purchase may be received by a first computing device from which a furniture is reserved. In response to the selection of the item to purchase, a message may be transmitted to a second computing device to deliver the selected item to the physical position of the furniture item associated with the first computing device. Abstract
As per Claim 15, Posch discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 14. However, Posch fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
transmit, to the second graphical user interface, the selection of the particular table; and
provide an indication confirming the reservation of the selected particular table for a specific time.
Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
transmit, to the second graphical user interface, the selection of the particular table (pg.6, ¶ [0071] discusses the reservation date 308, the reservation time 309 and the reservation guest number 310, which show the date, the time and the number of requested seats for the requested reservation-which can be modified or selected by the user via a pop-up numerical, text and/or scroll-down menu (not shown) that appears when the respective element 308, 309 or 310 is pushed or clicked); and
provide an indication confirming the reservation of the selected particular table for a specific time (Figure 4A, depicts booking confirmation window 402).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary still in the art to include in Posch the ability to display selected seats and provide confirmation to a customer as taught by Li since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim(s) 6, 9, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Posch WIPO WO 2021/222975 in view of Li, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0364836 in view of Stolts, II et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0224697 further in view of Petroulas U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0100529.
As per Claim 6, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination discloses the system of claim 1. However, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a recommendation on the first graphical user interface of certain foods based on a dining speed preference.
Petroulas teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a recommendation on the first graphical user interface of certain foods based on a dining speed preference (pg.21, ¶ [0384] discusses the system is arranged to calculate and collect information concerning the duration times of customers and associating the duration times with relevant constraint information. The constraint information may include menu, menu courses, time of booking, day of booking, occasion, and/or group size. The collected information is used to provide recommendations or autonomously adjust booking duration times allowed for different areas, subareas, sections or classes at different times, menus and courses offered).
The Examiner is construing the menu courses as a dining speed preference, because one of ordinary skill within the field of restaurants would recognize that the number of menu courses would decrease the dining speed as it would take more time to complete a 5 course meal as opposed to a single course meal.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch, Li and Stolts combination to include the ability to make menu course recommendations as taught by Petroulas to provide a computing system for effecting an optimised condition for one or more booking requests in a venue having one or more spaces, wherein the allocation module executes an allocation algorithm that utilises the booking information and the venue constraint information to assess the capacity of the one or more venues and allocate a portion of space for each booking request to satisfy the optimised condition utilising the assessment, to derive an optimised allocation instruction set. Abstract
As per Claim 9, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination discloses the system of claim 1. However, Posch, Li and Stolts fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
display a prompt for selecting a desired food service speed; and
display a prompt for selecting a desired duration of occupying the table.
Petroulas teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
display a prompt for selecting a desired food service speed (Figure 8c, depicts user interface 808, No. Courses 826, the desired number of courses); and
display a prompt for selecting a desired duration of occupying the table (Figure 8c, depicts user interface 808, Allocated time 830, Wish to leave by time 5:00pm).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch, Li and Stolts combination to include the ability to allow a customer to request the number of meal courses and amount of time to occupy a table as taught by Petroulas to provide a computing system for effecting an optimised condition for one or more booking requests in a venue having one or more spaces, wherein the allocation module executes an allocation algorithm that utilises the booking information and the venue constraint information to assess the capacity of the one or more venues and allocate a portion of space for each booking request to satisfy the optimised condition utilising the assessment, to derive an optimised allocation instruction set. Abstract
As per Claim 16, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 11. However, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a recommendation on the first graphical user interface of certain foods based on a dining speed preference.
Petroulas teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a recommendation on the first graphical user interface of certain foods based on a dining speed preference (pg.21, ¶ [0384] discusses the system is arranged to calculate and collect information concerning the duration times of customers and associating the duration times with relevant constraint information. The constraint information may include menu, menu courses, time of booking, day of booking, occasion, and/or group size. The collected information is used to provide recommendations or autonomously adjust booking duration times allowed for different areas, subareas, sections or classes at different times, menus and courses offered).
The Examiner is construing the menu courses as a dining speed preference, because one of ordinary skill within the field of restaurants would recognize that the number of menu courses would decrease the dining speed as it would take more time to complete a 5 course meal as opposed to a single course meal.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch, Li and Stolts combination to include the ability to make menu course recommendations as taught by Petroulas to provide a computing system for effecting an optimised condition for one or more booking requests in a venue having one or more spaces, wherein the allocation module executes an allocation algorithm that utilises the booking information and the venue constraint information to assess the capacity of the one or more venues and allocate a portion of space for each booking request to satisfy the optimised condition utilising the assessment, to derive an optimised allocation instruction set. Abstract
As per Claim 19, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 11. However, Posch, Li and Stolts fails to disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
display a prompt for selecting a desired food service speed; and
display a prompt for selecting a desired duration of occupying the table.
Petroulas teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
display a prompt for selecting a desired food service speed (Figure 8c, depicts user interface 808, No. Courses 826, the desired number of courses); and
display a prompt for selecting a desired duration of occupying the table (Figure 8c, depicts user interface 808, Allocated time 830, Wish to leave by time 5:00pm).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch, Li and Stolts combination to include the ability to allow a customer to request the number of meal courses and amount of time to occupy a table as taught by Petroulas to provide a computing system for effecting an optimised condition for one or more booking requests in a venue having one or more spaces, wherein the allocation module executes an allocation algorithm that utilises the booking information and the venue constraint information to assess the capacity of the one or more venues and allocate a portion of space for each booking request to satisfy the optimised condition utilising the assessment, to derive an optimised allocation instruction set. Abstract
Claim(s) 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Posch WIPO WO 2021/222975 in view of Li, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0364836 in view of Stolts, II et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0224697 further in view of Burt U.S. Patent Application Publication 2024/0346598.
As per Claim 8, Posch, Li and Stolts discloses the system of claim 7. However, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination fails to explicitly state wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a geolocation of the user; and
cause the delivery of concessions to the geolocation.
Burt teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a geolocation of the user (pg.12, ¶ [0165] discusses purchases made to vendors can be restricted to users that are actually at or in proximity to the location (e.g., as determined via GPS coordinates from the device used, address of the device used, etc.) so as to ensure that the user device making the purchase is actually in proximity to the location); and
cause the delivery of concessions to the geolocation (pg.6, ¶[0099] discusses in a geofenced or other defined indoor/outdoor environment, the goods/food can be delivered to a waypoint within the environment ( e.g., to a stall indicated by an umbrella or other indicia, etc.), or can be delivered to a specific seat if the environment is a stadium, food court, restaurant, or other type of venue with designated seating).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch, Li- Stolts combination to include the ability to provide food to customers with verified locations proximate to vendors as taught by Burt to provide an event management platform which unifies event coordinators, vendors, and mobile application users. Abstract
As per Claim 18, Posch, Li and Stolts discloses the system of claim 17. However, the Posch, Li and Stolts combination fails to explicitly state wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a geolocation of the user; and
cause the delivery of concessions to the geolocation.
Burt teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the system to:
provide a geolocation of the user (pg.12, ¶ [0165] discusses purchases made to vendors can be restricted to users that are actually at or in proximity to the location (e.g., as determined via GPS coordinates from the device used, address of the device used, etc.) so as to ensure that the user device making the purchase is actually in proximity to the location); and
cause the delivery of concessions to the geolocation (pg.6, ¶[0099] discusses in a geofenced or other defined indoor/outdoor environment, the goods/food can be delivered to a waypoint within the environment ( e.g., to a stall indicated by an umbrella or other indicia, etc.), or can be delivered to a specific seat if the environment is a stadium, food court, restaurant, or other type of venue with designated seating).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of food ordering before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Posch, Li and Stolts combination to include the ability to provide food to customers with verified locations proximate to vendors as taught by Burt to provide an event management platform which unifies event coordinators, vendors, and mobile application users. Abstract
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHFORD S HAYLES whose telephone number is (571)270-5106. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-4PM with Flex.
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, Fahd Obeid can be reached at 5712703324. 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.
/ASHFORD S HAYLES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627