DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The two information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/14/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, those information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
This office action is in reply to filing by applicant on 07/14/2025.
Claims 1 – 20 are currently pending and have been examined.
This action is made non-final.
Notice Regarding Double Patenting
Examiner notes that there is a potential double patenting rejection (as to claims 1 – 20 herein) based upon the allowed claims of the parent patent (US12361486) to this application. Presently, the allowed independent claims of the parent read on the initial independent claims herein, and, thus, the instant claims (and all claims dependent thereon) herein are all anticipated by the parent’s claims. Examiner will reserve final judgment on any such rejection however until the final claims herein are clearly established, noting that the present initial claims of 07/14/2025 are still subject to being amended by Applicant.
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 – 3 and 5 – 20 are rejected pursuant to 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Note that claim 4 is not rejected per 35 USC 101.
Claims 1 – 3 and 5 – 14 are directed to a method (process), claims 15 – 17 are directed to a system (machine), and claims 18 – 20 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium (composition). The claims therefore constitute eligible statutory categories of an invention. (Step 1: YES).
Independent claim 15 is here analyzed (it’s mirrored with independent claims 1 and 18)
Claim 15 recites the limitations of:
A computing system, comprising: one or more processors; and at least one memory comprising a plurality of program instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to (including the non-transitory CRM of independent claim 18): receive tolling data from at least a subset of a plurality of users, wherein the tolling data corresponds to a plurality of virtual transportation modes configured for use by the plurality of users, and wherein the tolling data from a respective user comprises data corresponding to a geographic destination for a respective virtual transportation mode of the respective user; determine one or more virtual hubs based on the tolling data, wherein the one or more virtual hubs comprise one or more destination virtual hubs corresponding to at least the geographic destination; generate a plurality of toll capacity units for at least the subset of the plurality of users based on the tolling data, wherein a respective toll capacity unit for the respective user corresponds to a fungible forward contract for the respective virtual transportation mode, wherein the respective toll capacity unit is associated with one or more predetermined spaces located within the one or more virtual hubs; and provide a toll capacity forward market platform for trading the plurality of toll capacity units, comprising: receive market depth data from the plurality of users, wherein the market depth data comprises data indicating a plurality of bid prices and data indicating a plurality of offer prices for the plurality of toll capacity units; and transmit the market depth data to the plurality of users based on the one or more virtual hubs.
The claims recite the abstract idea of:
shipping items in available cargo space(s) on various routes between various locations, including making bids, offers, tolls, and forward contracts applicable thereto.
The above abstract idea recites a fundamental economic practice and/or commercial interaction, i.e, shipping cargo according to some payment paradigm whilst optionally making bids, offers, and forward contracts respecting the same. This analysis concentrates on the fundamental economic practice and/or commercial interaction nature of the above bulleted abstract idea.
The above limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as a fundamental economic practice and/or commercial interaction, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, independent claim 15 (and 1,18) recites an abstract idea.
The above bolded terms of the mirrored independent claims 1, 15, and 18 recite
a computing system, one or more processors; at least one memory comprising a plurality of program instructions, non-transitory CRM): Said bolded independent claim terms are just applying generic computer components / computer driven systems to perform the above noted abstract idea limitations. The recitation of generic computer components in a claim does not necessarily preclude that claim from reciting an abstract idea. Any other potential computer related generic components claimed only serve to generally link the above noted abstract idea to them, without more. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES. The claims recite an abstract idea).
As to the dependent claims 2, 3, 5 - 14, 16 – 17, and 19 – 20, they further refine the above noted abstract idea set forth by the independent claims, with the following exception: Namely, claim 4 sets forth graphical layers visually displayed as superimposed upon navigational mapping shown on a user device, including electronic transmissions between such user devices. There is no abstract idea as to it. Examiner also notes that claim 9 sets forth utilization of GPS location coordinates using Sat Nav systems, but it remains dependent on rejected claim 8).
Examiner further notes that (save claim 4 as above discussed) there are no additional (to the computer related hardware as noted above) computer / computer driven terms set forth in the dependent claims: These dependent claims are also being applied as tools to the abstract idea, without more. Only through dependency do the dependent claims generally link the abstract idea articulated herein as above to generic computer technology.
The computer hardware/software above bolded are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., generic processors, computer systems, and memories all performing generic computer functions), and the same amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component(s). Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and are at a high level of generality. That said, the claims are directed to an abstract idea without a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO. The additionally claimed elements in the claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application).
All claims above reviewed also do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. When considered separately and as an ordered combination, the claims do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a computer hardware amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to perform a judicial exception by applying generic computer components and thereby automating the process cannot provide an inventive concept.
This Application's lack of providing significantly more than the judicial exception is also referred to as its claims lacking an “inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(f) where applying a computer as a tool to the abstract idea is not indicative of significantly more. The above detailed non-computer related elements do not change the outcome of the analysis, as they simply further limit ways which the abstract idea may be performed. (Step 2B: NO. The claims do not provide significantly more than the judicial exception).
In summary, the claim set reviewed as above does not include any additional elements that integrate its abstract idea into a practical application, or that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination.
Claims 1 – 3 and 5 – 20 are not patent-eligible pursuant to 35 USC 101.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to be in an independent claim form. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Independently, while the claims' limitations most recently set forth herein may individually be disclosed by the prior art, the claims as a whole are not obvious because the examiner would have to improperly use their separate limitations as a road map to combine them.
CONCLUSION
The following prior art made of record is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached form 892.
Jones (US20170046658A1) – Transportation services are matched with demand, in multiple segments in accordance with capabilities and business practices of a transportation service provider. A request for transportation services is received, including an origin, destination and a characterization of a load or service. Origin and destination geographical areas or locations are identified, and a main line segment and at least one distinct segment are identified to form a contiguous multi-segment routing. A transportation service provider is matched to the specified demand for transportation services, in order to comply with the scheduled sequence. One or more competitive bids are aggregated to provide a total bid price and provision of the transportation services are arranged using the candidate service interests winning the bid or bids.
Linville (US20080129490A1) – An apparatus and method for real time monitoring of cargo in transit from an origin to a destination. The real time monitoring device comprises a master processor for controlling operation of the device; a global positioning system (GPS) circuit for receiving GPS location data and determining a location of the cargo during transit; a sensor in communication with the processor for sensing a condition of the cargo during transit; a data storage for recording a plurality of data received from the sensor and the GPS circuit, including a date and time, the cargo location, and the sensed condition; a wireless communication modem and antenna in communication with the processor for transmitting, in real time, the date and time, the cargo location and the sensor data to a remote web server; and an onboard power supply for providing power to each element of the device.
Gurminder (US20060104224A1) – A wireless local area network access point is provided that authenticates users using fingerprint recognition. Users may register fingerprints with the wireless access point with the assistance of an authorized system administrator. When a registered user attempts to access the network, the user may be prompted to provide a fingerprint scan. A fingerprint reader in the user's equipment may be used to capture the user's fingerprint. The captured fingerprint may be submitted to the wireless access point for comparison with a database of fingerprints of authorized users. If the captured fingerprint is valid, the user may be granted wireless network access by the access point.
Kawakami (US20060184321A1) - A navigation system for a vehicle determines a recommended route to a destination among a plurality of possible routes to the destination based on total profile values of the plurality of possible routes. The navigation system guides the vehicle to the destination along the recommended route. Here, navigation system determines whether an upstream side section of one of the plurality of possible routes is located on a multi-lane road in a specific condition. The navigation system determines whether an exit road and an entrance road are connected to the multi-lane road on a common side of the multi-lane road. The navigation system sets an amount of increase to be reflected into the total profile value of the one of the plurality of possible routes based on determination results.
Brathwaite (US20180025417A1) - Techniques related to logistics management between two parties are described. According to one aspect of the present invention, a platform or a marketplace is created for shippers and carriers to match the need of each other. A shipper has an item to be shipped from a pick-up address to a delivery address while a carrier has some remaining capacity in a trailer or container to accommodate the item. One of the advantages, benefits and objects in the present invention is to facilitate the shipper and the carrier to meet each other via the platform over the Internet through data aggregation and distribution.
Riggs (US20020065738A1) - A logistics system manages the shipments of goods supplied from a plurality of different shippers by a plurality of carriers. It has a variety of modules integrated with each other to perform various functionalities. For example, it may have a purchasing module evaluating proposals by shippers for respective shipments of goods and awarding contracts for the shipments to the plurality of carriers. It may have an optimization module analyzing the proposals and informing the purchasing module if an opportunity exists for at least some of the shipments to be consolidated, in which case at least one contract awarded by the purchasing module is for a consolidated group of the shipments. It may have a contract administration module maintaining information relating to the status of proposals received and contracts awarded by the purchasing module. It may have a scheduling module scheduling shipments according to the awarded contracts. It may also have a shipment management module tracking the status of shipments awarded by the purchasing module and scheduled by said scheduling module. It may further have a financial module authorizing payments according to the status of shipments tracked by the shipment management module are passed between first and second asynchronous clock domains.
Dube (US20160321609A1) - A method includes obtaining a demand specification specifying a plurality of multi-modal freight shipment scenarios, each of the multi-modal freight shipment scenarios including at least a destination and an origin, generating, with a booking tool, a plurality of feasible multi-modal routes for each of the multi-modal freight shipment scenarios using route information from a carrier database, determining a plurality of business compliant routes among the plurality of feasible multi-modal routes for each of the multi-modal freight shipment scenarios using a rules specification specifying different business rules for each of the multi-modal freight shipment scenarios, comparing the multi-modal freight shipment scenarios by the business compliant routes determined for each respective one of the multi-modal freight shipment scenarios, and identifying at least one business rule, among the different business rules, affecting an aggregate cost-savings using the comparison of the multi-modal freight shipment scenarios.
Burnett (US20160224935A1) - A system for optimizing selection of a carrier for a shipment at a shipment location includes an interaction optimization platform. The interaction optimization platform has a carrier interface and a progress interface. The carrier interface is configured to display, on a carrier display device, carrier data fields for receiving carrier information regarding equipment capabilities and/or availability corresponding to a carrier. The progress interface is configured to display, on the shipper display device, shipment information comprising the shipment location. A server is configured to, by execution of the interaction optimization platform, perform operations including receiving electronic data comprising the shipment information. Also, the server compares the shipment location to locations stored in a server memory. Data is transmitted to the carrier interface that includes an indication that the shipment location is within a predefined distance from at least one of the locations and also transmitting location features including a location name.
Pollak (US20140324633A1) - A computer system and associated methods for implementing an online freight services marketplace. Freight service offerings posted to the marketplace by carriers are matched to freight service requests from shippers. Compound service offerings are formed from freight service offerings having service parameters (lane, space, transit time, availability, price, and status) that accommodate load parameters (origin, destination, size, and weight) of the freight service request. Compound service offerings selected by the shipper are provisioned and reserved for subsequent dispatch. Role-based access controls within the marketplace restrict visibility of confidential information, such as carrier pricing and shipper identity. Automatic freight transaction facilitation includes shipper payment processing and shipping document generation. Status tracking capability may be augmented with alert messaging and/or in-transit re-planning to minimize the impact of common issues that threaten to defeat a shipment in progress.
Betancourt (US20120078743A1) - A marketplace may be provided to allow posting of transport jobs and bidding on various aspects of the transport jobs. For example, a carrier may bid on transportation of cargo while fuel providers may bid on the fuel provision. In some arrangements, the carriers may solicit bids for a fueling portion of a transport job that they wish to bid on, have already bid on or have won. Transport may correspond to the physical conveyance of cargo from origin to destination and may include vehicle costs, driver costs, carrier fees and the like. Fuel costs may refer to the cost of fuel and/or pumping fees. A system may automatically generate suggested routes for transport and determine a projected amount of fuel needed for the trip. Additionally, the system may automatically identify potential or projected refueling locations and select refueling stations or providers based thereon.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW COBB whose telephone number is (571) 272-3850. The examiner can normally be reached 9 - 5, M - F.
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 call examiner Cobb as above, or 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, Peter Nolan, can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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.
/MATTHEW COBB/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights