Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
This action is a non-final office action on the merits. Claims 1-8 are pending.
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they are directed to an abstract idea without more.
Claims 1, 5 and dependents - are directed to a statutory class of invention. (method, system)
Claim 1 is exemplified (claim 5 is similar)
receiving, by at least …
from a user an electronic activity request to perform at least one activity based on a user selection by the user at …; requesting, … in response to the electronic activity request, data of the user from one or more databases; receiving, by the at least one processor, the data; authenticating, … the user based the data; and automatically processing, by the … , based on the data, a transfer of the data another online platform to perform the at least one electronic activity.
The limitations under there broadest reasonable interpretation cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity which recite a fundamental economic practice.
The limitations under their broadest reasonable interpretation cover performance of the limitation as certain methods of organizing human activity which recite a fundamental economic practice. Accordingly the claim recites an abstract idea,
The technical elements include,
one processor,
a user computing device
one processor,
The recitation of generic computing components in a claim does not necessarily preclude that claim from reciting an abstract idea. (Step. 2A prong 1, yes)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular the claims recite the additional elements of …
The technical elements include,
one processor,
a user computing device
one processor,
They are just recited at a high level of generality. The elements are no more than mere instructions to “apply it”.
The dependent claims do not add any technical elements. However, figure 1 contains computers and the remaining figures detail a web based interface which might be added to create a practical and technical application.
The dependent claims 2-4 and 6-8 further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims 1,5 and thus correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity and hence are abstract for the reasons above. Therefore the dependent claims are directed to an abstract idea and thus the claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-8 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication to Cunningham 20110231199 in view of US Patent Publication to 20100241493 to Onischuk (identity)
As per claim 1, Cunningham discloses;
A computer implemented method comprising:
receiving, by at least one processor, from a user an electronic activity
request to perform at least one activity based on a user selection by the user at a user computing device;
Cunningham( user voting electronic devices, 0041)
requesting, by the at least one processor, in response to the electronic activity request,
data of the user from one or more databases;
Cunningham(0066)
receiving, by the at least one processor,
the data; authenticating, by the at least one processor,
Cunningham(0041 identify the user)
the user based the data; and automatically processing, by the at least one processor, based on the data, a transfer of the data another online platform to perform the at least one electronic activity.
Here Cunningham does not explicitly discloses; what Onischuk teaches;
Onischuk- identity authentication (p. 7 authentication 0053)
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine the authentication of Onischuk with the voting disclosure of Cunniham combination for the motivation of “protect privacy when using an identifiable ballot” (0014)
Claim 5 is similar to claim 1.
As per claims 2, 7, Cunningham discloses;
The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one activity is a communication of the user with another user. (0079)
As per claims 3, 6, Cunningham discloses;
The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the at least one processor, information instructions according to selections by the user. (0043)
As per claims 4, 8 Cunningham discloses;
The method of claim 1, wherein the data comprises data identifying an ownership of at least one electronic asset by the user.
(0043)
Conclusion
Engineering Information Security: The Application of Systems Engineering Concepts to Achieve Information Assurance, 2015, IEEE
Safe Deals Between Strangers, Arxiv (Year: 1999)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE I EBERSMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3442. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 5:00 pm Monday-Friday.
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, Michael W Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/BRUCE I EBERSMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
