UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`I’.0. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION ‘NO.
`
`FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`I 1/293,350
`
`I2/0132005
`
`Ramakrishna Satyavolu
`
`P3977CIP
`
`3250
`
`24739
`?S90
`O8/23/2007
`CENTRAL coAsT PATENT AGENCY, me
`3 HANGAR WAY SUITE D
`WATSONVILLE, CA 95076
`
`NGUYEN. MMKHANH
`
`ART UNIT
`
`ZI76
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`08/23/2007
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04107)
`
`i
`i
`
`Plaid 1025
`Plaid 1025
`
`

`
`
`
`SATYAVOLU, RAMAKRISHNA
`
`Application No.
`
`1 1/293,350
`
`Examiner
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
`
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`2176
`Maikhanh Nguyen
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE Q MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS.
`WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`— Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 3? CFR 1.136(2).
`In no event. however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above. the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire six (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`— Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication. even it timely tiled, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.?04{b).
`
`Status
`
`1)lZI Responsive to communlcation(s) filed on 01 June 2007.
`
`2a)® This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)I:] This action is non-final.
`
`3):} Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`
`4)E Claim(s) 1-8 10-14 16-20 and 22-24 is/are pending in the application.
`
`4a) Of the above claim(s) __ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`5)I:l Claim(s) __ isiare allowed.
`
`6) Claim(s) 1-8 10-14 16-20 and 22-24 is/are rejected.
`
`7):] Claim(s) __ is/are objected to.
`
`8)[:I Claim(s) __ are subject to restriction andior election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`9)I:I The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`10)I:I The drawing(s) filed on __ isiare: a)i:I accepted or b)l:I objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the clrawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 3? CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d}.
`
`11)I:I The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152.
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)EI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`a)|:] All
`b)L__| Some * c)I:l None of:
`
`1.C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. __
`
`3.I:I Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachmentis}
`
`1) 8 Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`2) D Notice of Draftsperson's Patent Drawing Review {PTO-948)
`3) CI Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTOSSBSOB)
`Paper No(s}lMail Date _____.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Otfice
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06)
`
`1
`
`1
`
`4) D interview Summary (PTO-413)
`P399!’ N°(S)/Mall Data ___. -
`5} D N°“°e °f I“f°"“a' Pater“ APPr‘°3“°"
`6} D Other: i_.
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No.iMail Date 20070814
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11i293,350
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This action is responsive to the amendment filed 06/O1/2007.
`
`Claims 1-8, 10-14, 16-20, and 22-24 are pending in this application. Claims 1, 10, and
`
`13 have been amended. Claims 1 and 13 are independent claims.
`
`Please note that now Maikhanh Nguyen is in charge of examining this application.
`
`Please update future correspondence accordingly.
`
`Applicant’s Response
`
`2.
`
`In Applicant's Response dated 06/01/2007, Applicant amended claims 1 and 13 to
`
`overcome the objections. The prior objections to claims 1 and 13 are withdrawn.
`
`The Examiner would like to thank Applicant for the amendment to claim 10 responsive
`
`to the previous Office Action. However, “The system ofclaim 1_wherez'n " should be
`
`amended to read “The system ofclaim I wherein
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11l293,350
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Page 3
`
`Claim Rejections. 35 USC § 103
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. lO3(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 disclosea’ or described as set
`forth in section I 02 ofthis title, if the dijjferences 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.
`Patentabtliiy shall not be negativea’ by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1-4, 10-14, 16 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Stride et al. GJS 6792422) in Vl6W of Schutzer et al. (US
`
`5920848).
`
`As to claim 1:
`
`Stride discloses a system tangibly embodied on a computer-readable medium for
`
`categorizing transactions (see Title; sec Column 1, Lines 7-12 -> Stride discloses
`
`this limitation, as clearly indicated in the cited text), comprising:
`
`0
`
`a collection function gathering information concerning transactions, including
`
`at least date, description and amount of the transactions, for a particular
`
`person or enterprise (see Figure 3; see Column 2, Line 66 through Column 4,
`
`Line 18 —> Stride discloses this limitation in that system collects the
`
`transaction information displayed in Figure 3); and
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Page 4
`
`0
`
`a processing function categorizing individual ones of the collected transactions
`
`according to at least part of the transaction description (see Figures 2 and 3; see
`
`Column 4, Line 19 through Column 6, Line 23 —> Stride discloses this limitation
`
`in that system categorizes the collected transactions displayed in Figure 3 based
`
`on the descriptions of the transactions),
`
`0 wherein the collection function navigates to and retrieves the information
`
`concerning transactions from third-party lnternet—connected web sites adapted
`
`to provide account information (see Column 3, Lines 10-12; sec Column 3,
`
`Lines 52-64 —> Stride discloses this limitation in that system comprises an
`
`input/output system and operates on the Internet).
`
`Stride fails to expressly disclose Q93 the “information concerning transactions” is
`
`gathered. Also, Stride provides no details regarding to whom the “information
`
`concerning transactions” is provided. In terms of the claim language, Stride fails to
`
`expressly disclose wherein the collection function automatically retrieves the
`
`information concerning transactions from third-party Internet-connected web sites
`
`adapted to provide account information to the particular person or enterprise.
`
`Schutzer teaches a system tangibly embodied on a computer-readable medium for
`
`categorizing transactions (see Figures 1,2, 9, 20 and 21; see Column 3, Lines 33- 34;
`
`see Column 6, Line 7 through Column 7, Line 25 -> Schutzer teaches this limitation
`
`in that the system operates on a computer network and classifies financial transactions
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`into categories), comprising a collection function [that] automatically navigates to and
`
`retrieves information concerning transactions from Internet-connected web sites
`
`adapted to provide account information to a person or enterprise (see Column 3, Line
`
`24 through Column 5, Line l7 -> Schutzer teaches this limitation in that the system
`
`automatically navigates and collects information related to a user’s financial
`
`transactions using servers, clients and intelligent agents, and presents the information
`
`to the user), for the purpose of using financial transaction information to generate user-
`
`specific profiles, reports, alerts, alarms and reminders (see Column 5, Lines 8-17).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed in Stride, to include:
`
`a collection function [that] automatically navigates to and retrieves the information
`
`concerning transactions from third-party Internet-connected web sites adapted to
`
`provide account information to the particular person or enterprise, for the purpose of
`
`using financial transaction information to generateuscr-specific profiles, reports,
`
`alerts, alarms and reminders, as taught in Schutzer.
`
`As to claim 2:
`
`Stride discloses Microsoft Money 2000, which comprises financial transaction tracking
`
`software that generates reports once a user’s expenditures have been categorized (see
`
`Column 1, Lines 21-25). Stride provides no details regarding the exact content of the
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`reports.
`
`Thus, Stride fails to expressly disclose a compilation function summarizing
`
`transactions in individual categories.
`
`Schutzer teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figures 1,2, 9, 20 and 21;
`
`see Column 3, Lines 33-34; see Column 6, Line 7 through Column 7, Line 25
`
`-> Schutzer teaches this limitation in that the system automatically classifies financial
`
`expenses), comprising a compilation function summarizing transactions in individual
`
`categories (see Figures 9, 20 and 21; see Column 3, Lines 36-51; see Column 6, Lines
`
`39-53; see Column 1 1, Line 57 through Column 12, Line 45 -> Schutzer teaches this
`
`limitation in that the system generates financial reports and summaries based on
`
`expense categories), for the purpose of providing an integrated financial transaction
`
`and financial accounting system with incorporated intelligent agents to meet the
`
`important financial needs of synthesizing, parsing and analyzing a user's complete
`
`financial picture (see Column 3, Lines 24-38).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed in Stride, to include a
`
`compilation function summarizing transactions in individual categories,
`
`for the purpose of providing an integrated financial transaction and financial
`
`accounting system with incorporated intelligent agents to meet the important financial
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 111293350
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`needs of synthesizing, parsing and analyzing a user's complete financial picture, as
`
`taught by Schutzer.
`
`As to claim 3:
`
`Stride discloses Microsoft Money 2000, which comprises financial transaction tracking
`
`software that generates reports once a user's expenditures have been categorized.
`
`Stride provides no details regarding to whom the reports are provided.
`
`Thus, Stride fails to expressly disclose a reporting function reporting the summarizing
`
`transactions to the particular person or enterprise.
`
`Schutzer teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figures 9, 20 and 21; see
`
`Column 3, Lines 33-34 —> Schutzer teaches this limitation in that the system
`
`automatically classifies financial expenses), comprising a reporting function reporting
`
`the summarizing transactions to the particular person or enterprise (see Figures 9, 20
`
`and 21 ; see Column 3, Lines 36-51 ; see Column 6, Lines 39-53; see Column 1 1, Line
`
`57 through Column 12, Line 45 —> Schutzer teaches this limitation in that the system
`
`generates financial reports and summaries based on expense categories and provides the
`
`reports and summaries to users), for the purpose of providing an integrated financial
`
`transaction and financial accounting system With incorporated intelligent agents to meet
`
`the important financial needs of synthesizing, parsing and analyzing a user‘s complete
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`financial picture (see Column 3, Lines 24-38).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed in Stride, to include a
`
`reporting function reporting the summarizing transactions to the particular
`
`person or enterprise, for the purpose of providing an integrated financial transaction
`
`and financial accounting system with incorporated intelligent agents to meet the
`
`important financial needs of synthesizing, parsing and analyzing a user's complete
`
`financial picture, as taught by Schutzer.
`
`As to claim 4:
`
`Strideidiscloses categorization [that] is done according to category definitions entered
`
`a person (see Figures 2 and 3; see Column 4, Line 19 through Column 6, Line 23 —>
`
`Stride discloses this limitation in that system includes mappings of business names to
`
`categories and mappings of keywords to categories. These mappings are “category
`
`definitions,” and they inherently must have been "entered" by the person who wrote
`
`the code that defines the mappings used by the system).
`
`Stride provides no details regarding whether a user of the system can modify the
`
`mappings.
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Thus, Stride fails to expressly disclose categorization [that] is done according to
`
`category definitions entered by the particular person or on behalf of the
`
`enterprise.
`
`Schutzer teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figures 9, 20 and 21; see
`
`Column 3, Lines 33-34 -> Schutzer teaches this limitation in that the system“
`
`automatically classifies financial expenses), comprising categorization [that] is done
`
`according to category definitions entered by the particular person or on behalf of the
`
`enterprise (see Column 14, Line 66 through Column 15, Line 18 -> Schutzer teaches this
`
`limitation in that the system allows the user to specify new expense categories for the
`
`user's accounts and to change a category of a payee), for the purpose of providing an
`
`integrated financial transaction and financial accounting system with incorporated
`
`intelligent agents to meet the important financial needs of synthesizing, parsing and
`
`analyzing a user’s complete financial picture (see Column 3, Lines 24-38).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed in Stride, to include
`
`categorization [that] is done according to category definitions entered by the
`
`particular person or on behalf of the enterprise, for the purpose of providing an
`
`integrated financial transaction and financial accounting system with incorporated
`
`intelligent agents to meet the important financial needs of synthesizing, parsing and
`
`analyzing a user's complete financial picture, as taught by Schutzer.
`
`

`
`Applicationicontrol Number: 11/293,350
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Page 10
`
`As to claim 10:
`
`Stride discloses [that] the system reports to clients through the Internet network (see
`
`Column 3, Lines 52-64 —> Stride discloses this limitation in that system operates on the
`
`Internet).
`
`As to claim 11:
`
`Stride discloses [that] the system further comprises a function storing past transaction
`
`history associated with the particular person or enterprise (see Figures 2 and 3; see
`
`Column 4, Line 19 through Column 6, Line 23 —> Stride discloses this limitation in
`
`that system stores the transaction history of users).
`
`As to claim 12:
`
`Stride fails to expressly disclose past transaction history [that] is used to predict future
`
`transaction statistical information.
`
`Schutzer teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figures 9, 20 and 21; see
`
`Column 3, Lines 33-34 -> Schutzer teaches this limitation in that the system
`
`automatically classifies financial expenses), comprising past transaction history [that] is
`
`used to predict future transaction statistical information (see Figures 1-29; see Column
`
`1, Line 1 through Column 22, Line 22 -> Schutzer teaches this limitation in that the
`
`system projects future financial numbers for a user based on the user's financial history),
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`‘ Art Unit: 2176
`
`Page 11
`
`for the purpose of providing an integrated financial transaction and financial accounting
`
`system with incorporated intelligent agents to meet the important financial needs of
`
`synthesizing, parsing and analyzing a user’s complete financial picture (see Column 3,
`
`Lines 24-38).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed in Stride, to include past
`
`transaction history [that] is used to predict future transaction statistical information,
`
`for the purpose of providing an integrated financial transaction and financial
`
`accounting system with incorporated intelligent agents to meet the important financial
`
`needs of synthesizing, parsing and analyzing a user's complete financial picture, as
`
`taught by Schutzer.
`
`As to claims 13, 14, 16, and 22-24:
`
`Claims 13, 14, 16 and 22-24 merely recite the method performed by the system recited
`
`in claims 3, 2, 4 and 10-12, respectively. Thus, claims 13, l4, I6 and 22-24 are
`
`rejected using the same rationale indicated in the above rejections for claims 3, 2, 4
`
`and 10-12.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 5-8 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. l03(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`Stride, in view of Schutzer, and further in view of Triggs ( U.S. Publication No. US
`
`2003/0204485).
`
`

`
`ApplicationiControl Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`As to claim 5:
`
`As indicated in the above rejection, Stride, in View of Schutzer, discloses/teaches every
`
`limitation of Claim 1.
`
`Stride also discloses [that] categorization is done for a first plurality of persons or
`
`enterprises subscribing to the system according to category definition entered by a
`
`second plurality of persons or enterprises (see Figures 2 and 3; see Column 4, Line 19
`
`through Column 6, Line 23 —> Stride discloses this limitation in that system includes
`
`mappings of business names to categories and mappings of keywords to categories.
`
`These mappings are “category definitions”, that are used to categorize a user’s
`
`transactions, and the mappings inherently must have been “entered” by the person
`
`who wrote the code that defines the mappings used by the system).
`
`Stride, in View of Schutzer, fails to expressly disclose/teach categorization [that] is
`
`done for a first plurality of persons or enterprises subscribing to the system according
`
`to category definition entered by a second plurality of persons or enterprises
`
`subscribing to the system.
`
`Triggs teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figure 4; see Page 1,
`
`Paragraph 0001 —> Triggs teaches this limitation in that the system automatically
`
`classifies information), comprising categorization [that] is done for a first plurality of
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`«
`
`A
`
`Page 13
`
`persons or enterprises subscribing to the system according to category definition
`
`entered by a second plurality of persons or enterprises subscribing to the system (see
`
`Figure 4; see Page 2, Paragraph 0024 through Page 7, Paragraph 0150 -> Trigg
`
`teaches this limitation in that that system comprises a secure server that determines
`
`whether a user may access the system, a database comprising cataloged information,
`
`information collection agents that collect information and catalog agents that place
`
`the collected information in the proper categories, wherein the catalog agents may use
`
`pattern matching and fuzzy logic to create new categories and/or assign information
`
`to the proper categories. Also, the system allows users to designate the proper
`
`categories for information that is to be stored on the database. Finally, the system
`
`comprises a category manager that associates phrases and keywords to corresponding
`
`categories and automatically generates phrases and keywords for new categories of
`
`information), for the purpose of managing information on a computer network (see
`
`Page 1, Paragraph 0018).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed/taught in Stride, in View
`
`of Schutzer, to include categorization [that] is done for a first plurality of persons or
`
`enterprises subscribing to the system according to category definition entered by a
`
`second plurality of persons or enterprises subscribing to the system, for the purpose
`
`of managing information on a computer network, as taught by Triggs.
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`As to claim 6:
`
`Stride, in view of Schutzer, fails to expressly disclose/teach categories [that] are
`
`developed from information taken from communication between clients and the system.
`
`Triggs teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figure 4; see Page 1,
`
`Paragraph 0001 -> Triggs teaches this limitation in that the system automatically
`
`classifies information), comprising categories [that] are developed from information
`
`taken from communication between clients and the system (see Figure 4; see Page 2,
`
`Paragraph 0024
`
`through Page 7, Paragraph 0150 —> Trigg teaches this limitation, as indicated in the
`
`above rejection for Claim 5), for the purpose of managing information on a computer
`
`network (see Page 1, Paragraph 0018).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed/taught in Stride, in view
`
`of Schutzer, to include categories [that] are developed from information taken from
`
`communication between clients and the system, for the purpose of managing
`
`information on a computer network, as taught by Triggs.
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 15
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`As to claim 7:
`
`Stride, in view of Schutzer, fails to expressly disclose/teach a probability algorithm
`
`[that] is used in developing categories.
`
`Triggs teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figure 4; see Page 1,
`
`Paragraph 0001 —> Triggs teaches this limitation in that the system automatically
`
`classifies information), comprising a probability algorithm [that] is used in developing
`
`categories (see Figure 4; see Page 2, Paragraph 0024 through Page 7, Paragraph 0150 -e
`
`\
`
`Trigg teaches this limitation, as indicated in the above rejection for Claim 5), for the
`
`purpose of managing information on a computer network (see Page 1, Paragraph 0018).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed/taught in Stride, in View
`
`of Schutzer, to include a probability algorithm [that] is used in developing categories,
`
`for the purpose of managing information on a computer network, as taught by Triggs.
`
`As to claim 8:
`
`Stride, in view of Schutzer, fails to expressly disclose/teach identifiers for categories
`
`[that] are periodically amended according to further information that is collected and
`
`processed.
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 16
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Triggs teaches a system for categorizing transactions (see Figure 4; see Page 1,
`
`Paragraph 0001 —> Triggs teaches this limitation in that the system automatically
`
`classifies information), comprising identifiers for categories [that] are periodically
`
`amended according to further information that is collected and processed (see Figure 4;
`
`see Page 2, Paragraph 0024 through Page 7, Paragraph 0150 —> Trigg teaches this
`
`limitation, as indicated in the above rejection for Claim 5), for the purpose of
`
`managing information on a computer network (see Page 1, Paragraph 0018).
`
`Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
`
`time the invention was made to modify the system, disclosed/taught in Stride, in view of
`
`Schutzer, to include identifiers for categories [that] are periodically amended according
`
`to fiirther information that is collected and processed for the purpose of managing
`
`information on a computer network, as taught by Triggs.
`
`As to claims 17-20:
`
`Claims 17-20 merely recite the method performed by the system recited in claims 5-8,
`
`respectively. Thus, claims 17-20 are rejected using the same rationale indicated in the
`
`above rejections for claims 5-8.
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11/293,350
`
`Page 17
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`6.
`
`Applicant’s arguments filed 06/01/2007 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`persuasive.
`
`a. Regarding independent claims 1 and 13
`
`Applicant argues that Stride does not a software gathering function as claimed.
`
`The examiner’s response is as follows. Firstly, in the Office Action, the examiner
`
`mapped each claimed limitation to specific element(s) and/or relevant passages in the
`
`references to show how the references meet the claim limitations. Applicant in
`
`response did not provide any underlying analysis as to why the portions of the prior art
`
`relied on did not support the examiner’s position. Secondly, as shown through the
`
`mapping provided in the claim rejections, the combination of Stride and Schutzer
`
`teaches
`
`each limitation of claims 1-4, 10-14, 16 and 22-24, and the combination of Stride,
`
`Schutzer, and Triggs meets the respective recited limitations in claims 5-8 and 17-20 as
`
`set forth in the previous Office Action.
`
`1). Regarding dependent claims 2-8, 10-12,14, 16, and 17-24
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 111293350
`
`Page 18
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Applicant did not provide arguments in substance regarding claims 2-8, 10-1 2,14, 16,
`
`and 17-24 except for citing the dependencies.
`
`Conclusion .
`
`7.
`
`The prior art made of record, listed on PTO 892 provided to Applicant is considered
`
`to have relevancy to the claimed invention. Applicant should review each identified
`
`reference carefully before responding to this office action to properly advance the
`
`case in light of the prior art.
`
`8.
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.0’/’(a). Applicant is reminded
`
`of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR l.l36(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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR l.l36(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 fiorn the mailing date of this final action.
`
`

`
`Application/Control Number: 11!293,350
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Page 19
`
`Contact information
`
`9.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`_ examiner should be directed to Maikhanh Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)
`
`272-4093. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 9:00am —
`
`5:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the
`
`examiner’s supervisor, Doug Hutton can be reached at (571) 272-4137.
`
`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:f;/pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (BBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`Any response to this action should be mailed to:
`Commissioner for patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`MN
`
`U)€'a2..,«5b"0"”
`
`

`
`Application/Control No.
`‘“293«35°
`,
`Exammer
`
`Maikhanh Nguyen
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Page 20
`Page 20
`
`App!icant(s)lPatent Under
`R
`'
`t‘
`
`_
`Art Umt
`
`2176
`
`Page 1 °”
`
`Document Number
`
`Date
`
`‘
`
`
`
`S::')$AT;gaL8,nRAMAKRlSHNA Notice of References Cited
`.I.“
`
`
`E us-5,901,593 A
`10-1099
`Gabber et al.
`7091219
`In:
`E US-6,078,924 A
`an US-6,199,079 131
`in US-6,517,587 B2
`3 us-200210023104
`
`
`
`
`
`00-2000
`03-2001
`02-2003
`02-2002
`
`Ainsbury et al.
`Gupta et at.
`Satyavoiu etal.
`SATYAVOLU etal.
`
`
`
`
`207/101
`7151507
`71515011
`70715011
`
`
`
`Mr~§3?«‘v°wT
`
`‘A copy of this reference is not being furnished with this Offce action. (See MPEP § 707.05(a}.)
`Dates in MM—YYYY format are publication dates. Classifications may be US or foreign.
`‘
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`PTO-892 (Rev. 01-2001)
`
`Notice of References Cited
`
`Part of Paper No. 200?0814
`
`

`
`_
`Index Of Claims
`
`Applicationicontroi No.
`
`11/293,350
`Examiner
`
`Page 21
`Page 21
`Appiicant(s)IPatent under
`Reexamination
`
`SATYAVOLU, RAMAKRISHNA
`Art Unit
`
`Maikhanh N u en
`
`2176
`
`H
`
`(Through numeral)
`
`canceued
`
`Non-Elected
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Paper No. 20070814
`
`

`
`Page 22
`Page 22
`Applicant(s)lPatent under
`Reexamination
`
`SATYAVOLU, RAMAKRISHNA
`
`Applicationlcontrol No.
`
`11/293,350
`Examiner
`
` Maikhanh Ngu en
`
`SEARCH NOTES
`
`(INCLUDING SEARCH STRATEGY)
`
`
`
`Search Notes
`
`
`
`
`
`SEARCHED‘
`
`Class
`
`Subclass
`
`Date
`
`Updated
`
`707
`
`705
`
`8l1 6/200?
`
`3X
`
`1.4.6
`
`8i16/200?
`
`MK
`
`8/ 1 6/200?
`
`40.42
`
`8/16/2003?’
`
`MK
`
`— 8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/1612007
`8/161200?
`
`Inventor Name Search
`Na 6,10
`
`West Search {USPAT, USPGPUD.
`EPO. JPO, DERWENT) - See Search
`History Printout
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INTERFERENCE SEARCHED
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`Part of Papef N°- 20070314
`
`

`
`Search History Transcript
`
`11/2613, 5550
`
`Page 23
`Pagg 23
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`WEST Search History
`
`DATE: Thursday, August 16, 2007
`
`Hide? N53‘:-fie
`
`uer
`
`DB=USPT; PLUR=YES; OP=0R
`
`[:1
`
`L21
`
`(5983227 or 6029192).pn.
`
`DB =PGPB, USPT; PL UR= YES; 0P=0R
`
`{:1
`
`L20
`
`20020023104
`
`{:3
`
`[3
`
`B
`
`[3
`D
`
`F
`"
`
`C
`
`DB=US‘PT.' PLUR=YES; 0P=0R
`
`L19
`
`L18
`
`(6192380 or 6199079).pn.
`
`Z
`
`5961593.pn.
`
`DB=USPT,PGPB,' PLUR=YES; OP=OR
`
`L17
`
`'5768577'1 '5787-425'] '5838918'| ’5893128’| ‘5937168'1 '6021409’] '6085188'[
`('5442771'
`'6085238'1 '6101500'| ’6122673'[ '6169992‘{ '6185601‘| '6381640')![pn}
`
`DB=USPT; PLUR=YES; OP=0R
`
`L16
`L15
`
`6517587.pn.
`,
`(5920848 or 5842185 or 6,078,924 or 6,901,394 or 6,421,768 or 5,999,971 or 6,067,580 or
`5,774,660).pn.
`
`DB =USPT,PGPB; PLUR=YES; 0P=0R
`
`.
`
`L14
`
`(‘5559313'[ '5748908'[ '5781897’l ’5842185'|‘5903881'['5920848‘| '6208993’| '6401073‘|
`'6430539')![pn]
`
`L13
`
`('5546452’]‘SS57518'l'5590I97‘[ ‘564911S'| ’5710887‘[ ‘5727950‘)![pn]
`
`DB=USPT; PLUR=YES; 0P=0R
`
`L12
`
`(6792422 or 5920848).pn.
`
`Gill‘!-tit
`
`2
`
`1
`
`2
`
`1
`
`14
`
`1
`8
`
`9
`
`6
`
`2
`
`C
`
`1;
`
`‘:1
`
`E}
`
`"'1
`“"
`
`3
`
`1:]
`
`:3
`
`1:}
`
`E}
`
`E
`
`1:]
`
`L1 1
`
`6,199,077.pn.
`
`DB =PGPB, USPT; PL UR= YES; 0P=0R
`
`L10
`
`L9 and (financial adj transaction)
`
`L9
`
`L8
`
`L7
`
`L6
`
`L5
`
`L4
`
`L3
`
`L2
`
`L1
`
`L8 and (www or web$ or html)
`
`L7 and ((_(brows$ or naviga}t$ or retrieV$ or view$ or display$ or present$ or rende1'$) near2
`information) same transact1on$ 1)
`
`L6 and (transaction$1 same (person$1 or enterprise$1))
`
`L5 and ((gather$ or co11ect$) near2 information)
`
`L4 and (categor$ near2 transaction$1)
`
`L3 or L2 or L1
`
`7'07/(1,4,6).cc1s.
`
`705/(6,10,26,40,42).cc1s.
`
`(715/501.1).cc1s.
`
`.
`
`V
`
`A
`
`1
`
`2
`
`12
`
`15
`
`32
`
`102
`
`302
`
`175997
`
`97364
`
`120283
`
`1580
`
`END OF SEARCH HISTORY
`
`httpzf/jupiter2:9000/bin/cgi-bin/srchhist.p1?state=tnvjV.33.1&i%toc1&userid=mnguyen7
`
`8/ 16/07