`
`By Carrie A. Gibson at 12:42 pm, Feb 03, 2011 S D L/S B R
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313- 1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
`
` F ING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`
`
`
`
`CONF {MATION NO.
`
`11/347,024
`
`02/03/2006
`
`David Cheng
`
`56920— 8005.US00
`
`13 83
`
`02/03/2011
`
`BASIT, ABDUL
`
`7590
`25096
`pERKINs com LLP
`PATENT-SEA
`
`P.O. BOX 1247
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-1247
`
`Docketed:
`FINAL Office Action
`3/3: 05/03/11
`
`6/6: 08/03/11
`
` NOT *ICATION DATE
`
`3694
`
`
`
`
`02/03/201 1
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`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.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`patentprocurement @perkinscoie.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`Zillow Exhibit 2004
`
`Trulia, Inc. vs. Zillow, Inc.
`
`CBM2013-00056
`
`

`

`
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
` 11/347,o24 CHENG ET AL.
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`ABDUL BASIT
`3694
`
`-- 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 3 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 37 CFR1. 136(a).
`In no event however may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX () 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 if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1)|Zl Responsive to communication(s) filed on 15 November 2010.
`
`a)IZI This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`
`3)|:l 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 Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims
`
`4)IXI Claim(s) 1-43 is/are pending in the application.
`
`4a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`5)|:| Claim(s) _ is/are allowed.
`
`6)|Xl Claim(s) 1-_43is/are rejected.
`
`7)I:I Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`8)I:I Claim(s) _ are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`
`Application Papers
`
`9)|:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`OH] The drawing(s) filed on _ is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 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)|:| 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)I:I Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`
`a)I:I AII
`
`b)I:I Some * c)I:I None of:
`
`1.|:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. _
`
`3.|:l 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.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`1) I] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`2) I] Notice of Draftsperson‘s Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948)
`3) IZI Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date _.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`4) I] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper N0(S )/Mai| Date. _
`5)I:I NOTICQ 0f Informal Patent Application
`6)I:I Other:—
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 08-06)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20110129
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`This action is in response to Applicant’s remarks received on 11/15/2010. Based
`
`on the Applicant’s remarks, the 35 U.S.C 102 rejection is withdrawn. However, the 35
`
`U.S.C. 103 rejections are not withdrawn. Thus, a final rejection on the merits is issued.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`1.
`
`The following is a quotation of 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 of this title, 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 negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`1.
`
`Claims 1-10, 13-18, and 23-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Khedkar (US Pat. No. 6,609,18) in view of Kim (US Pat. Pub. No.
`
`2005/0154657)
`
`Response to Applicant’s Remarks
`
`Applicant makes several assertions as to why the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection is
`
`improper. Some of the assertions are general in nature. A response is given to specific
`
`assertions given by the Applicant that require a substantive response.
`
`Regarding claim 1, the Applicant asserts that the Kim reference does not
`
`disclose inputs from an owner. However, since an appraisal may require permission
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`from an owner for some of the information included in the appraisal, owner input is
`
`taught by Kim.
`
`Second, again regarding claim 1, the Applicant asserts that the Kim reference
`
`does not disclose any value of home improvement values. According to paragraph 36,
`
`the Kim reference discloses an “updated bathroom.”
`
`Regarding claim 2, the Applicant asserts that the Khedkar reference does not
`
`disclose any display of information. According to col. 13 lines 1-20, the system provides
`
`an output from a computing device which inherently requires a display. Also, Khedkhar
`
`discloses a refined value since col. 13 lines 1-20 disclose a process that improves a
`
`previous estimate.
`
`Regarding claim 15, the Applicant asserts that the Khedkar reference does not
`
`disclose "obtaining user input adjusting at least one aspect information..." Based on the
`
`claim language, the claims can be interpreted for getting input values that would result
`
`in the change of information used in the valuation of the home. Since the Khedkar
`
`reference does teach inputs on bedrooms and other property characteristics, this would
`
`teach the user input; and since the reference teaches an invention that can be used on
`
`more than one property, the system will adjust outputs based on changing inputs.
`
`Regarding claim 41, the Applicant asserts that Khedkar does not disclose
`
`information that is obtained from a public source and information obtained from an
`
`owner. Sales price information is available from public sources and is taught in col. 10
`
`lines 20-50 and col. 12 and 13. Also owner input occurs when the appraiser enters a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`property and obtains information on square footage or any updated features of the
`
`home.
`
`Regarding claim 1:
`
`Khedkar teaches a method in a computing system for automatically determining a
`
`valuation for a subject home in response to input from an owner of the home,
`
`comprising:
`
`presenting a display that includes an indication of a first valuation determined for the
`
`subject home and indications of attributes of the subject home used in the
`
`determination, the indicated valuation being determined by applying to the indicated
`
`attributes a geographically-specific home valuation model is based upon a plurality of
`
`homes near the subject home recently sold; (see at least 00/. 8, lines 30-35 and col. 2,
`
`lines 64-65 disclosing a valuation based on geographic specific property)
`
`presenting a display that solicits input from the owner that updates one or more of the
`
`indicated attributes; (see at 00/. 6, lines 1 -25 and col. 5, lines 63-65 disclosing updating
`
`inputs)
`
`receiving first input from the owner that updates one or more of the indicated
`
`attributes; (see at 00/. 6, lines 1-25 and col. 5, lines 63-65 disclosing updating inputs)
`
`applying the geographically-specific home valuation model to attributes of the subject
`
`home as updated by the first input to determine and display a second valuation for the
`
`subject home; (see at 00/. 8, lines 45-65 disclosing using the values to obtain a second
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`valuation)
`
`using the second input to determine and display (a) a present value of the identified
`
`home improvements and (b) a third valuation that takes into account the present value
`
`of the identified home improvements; (see at least 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines
`
`1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`presenting a display that solicits input from the owner that identifies other assets or
`
`liabilities of the subject home and the value attributed to them by the owner;
`
`receiving third input from the owner that identifies other aspects of the subject home
`
`affecting its value and the value attributed to them by the owner; (see at least 00/. 12,
`
`lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new
`
`evaluation)
`
`determining a valuation adjustment corresponding to the identified aspects; (see at least
`
`00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates
`
`a new evaluation)
`
`displaying a fourth valuation that takes into account the determined valuation
`
`adjustment corresponding to the identified aspects; (see at least 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and
`
`00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`presenting a display that solicits input from the owner that identifies homes near the
`
`subject home that the owner regards as similar to the subject home; (see at least 00/.
`
`12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a
`
`new evaluation)
`
`receiving fourth input from the owner that identifies homes near the subject home
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`recently sold that the owner regards as similar to the subject home; (see at least 00/. 12,
`
`lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new
`
`evaluation)
`
`using the fourth input to generate a tailored geographically-specific home valuation
`
`model that (1) is based upon a plurality of homes near the subject home recently sold
`
`that is a superset of the homes identified by the fourth input, but (2) places special
`
`emphasis on the homes identified by the fourth input; (see at least 00/. 12, lines 62-65
`
`and 00/. 13, lines 1 -20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`applying the tailored valuation model to the updated attributes of the subject home to
`
`obtain a fifth valuation of the subject home; (see at least 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13,
`
`lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`NOTE: Applicant is also directed to claim 1 -3 of the Khedkar reference which disclose a
`
`reiterative process that discloses the reiterative process occurring in claim 1 of the
`
`Application)
`
`Kim, not Khedkar, teaches presenting a display that solicits input from the owner that
`
`identifies the type, cost, and timing of one or more home improvements performed on
`
`the subject home; (see at least paragraph 36 and 37)
`
`It would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to modify Khedkar with Kim, since attempting to obtain the best value for a
`
`home is the goal of property appraisals.
`
`Regarding claim 2:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests a computer-readable medium whose contents cause a
`
`computing
`
`system to perform a method for procuring information about a distinguished property
`
`from its owner that is usable to refine an automatic valuation of the distinguished
`
`property, the method comprising:
`
`displaying at least a portion of information about the distinguished property used in the
`
`automatic valuation of the distinguished property; (see at least 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and
`
`00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`obtaining user input from the owner adjusting at least one aspect of information about
`
`the distinguished property used in the automatic valuation of the distinguished property;
`
`(see at least 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system
`
`that creates a new evaluation)and
`
`displaying to the owner a refined valuation of the distinguished property that is based on
`
`the adjustment of the obtained user input. (see at least 00/. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing
`
`attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13,
`
`lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 3:
`
`Khedkar, not Cheetham, teaches that the computer-readable medium of claim 2, further
`
`comprising: determining whether any of the altered home attributes is an attribute not
`
`present among home sales used to construct the geographically-specific home
`
`valuation model; and if so, displaying a warning.
`
`(col. 5, lines 45-45 disclosing a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`warning occurring if not within a certain range) It would have been obvious to try to one
`
`of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a warning in the event a
`
`data value was not correct.
`
`Regarding claim 4:
`
`Khedkhar, not Cheetham, teaches that the computer-readable medium of claim 2,
`
`further comprising: determining whether the refined valuation diverges from the
`
`automatic valuation by more than a threshold percentage; and
`
`if so, displaying a warning. (col. 5, lines 45-45 disclosing a warning occurring if not
`
`within a certain range) It would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`at the time of the invention to provide a warning in the event a data value was not
`
`COFFGCL
`
`Regarding claim 5:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the computer-readable medium of claim 2 wherein the
`
`adjustment of the obtained user input includes altering property attributes used in the
`
`automatic valuation of the distinguished property, and wherein the displayed refined
`
`valuation is based at least in part on the altered property attributes. (see at least 00/. 10,
`
`lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; 00/. 12,
`
`lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new
`
`evaluation)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`Regarding claim 6:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests that the computer-readable medium of claim 2 wherein the
`
`adjustment of the obtained user input includes adding a description of an improvement
`
`to the distinguished property, and wherein the displayed refined valuation is based at
`
`least in part on a valuation of the described improvement. (see at least col. 10, lines 20-
`
`50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; col. 12, lines 62-65
`
`and col. 13, lines 1 -20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to use Kim to suggest all the features in the claim.
`
`Regarding claim 7:
`
`Khedkar that the computer-readable medium of claim 2 wherein the adjustment of the
`
`obtained user input includes adding a description of an aspect of the distinguished
`
`property not considered by the automatic valuation of the distinguished property and an
`
`estimate by the owner of its value, and wherein the displayed refined valuation is based
`
`at least in part on the estimate of the value of the described aspect. (see at least col. 10,
`
`lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; col. 12,
`
`lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new
`
`evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 8:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`Khedkar teaches that the computer-readable medium of claim 2 wherein the adjustment
`
`of the obtained user input includes identifying recent sales of nearby properties
`
`regarded by the owner as similar to the distinguished property, and wherein the
`
`displayed refined valuation is based at least in part on a repetition of the automatic
`
`valuation of the distinguished property in which the influence of the identified sales is
`
`magnified. (see at least 00/. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a
`
`bathroom or bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the
`
`Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 9:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests that the computer-readable medium of claim 8 wherein the
`
`adjustment of the obtained user input further includes identifying a scoring of the
`
`properties sold in the identified sales reflecting the relative level of similarity of the sold
`
`properties to the distinguished property, and wherein the displayed refined valuation is
`
`based at least in part on a repetition of the automatic valuation of the distinguished
`
`property in which the influence of the identified sales is magnified in a manner
`
`consistent with the identified scores. (see at least 00/. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing
`
`attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13,
`
`lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 10:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 11
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`Kedkhar teaches that the computer-readable medium of claim 9 wherein the user input
`
`identifies a scoring of the properties sold in the identified sales reflecting the relative
`
`level of similarity of the sold properties to the distinguished property by specifying a
`
`ranked order for the identified sales. (see at least 00/. 8, lines 20-40 disclosing similar
`
`houses; 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that
`
`creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 13:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests that the computer-readable medium of claim 8, the method
`
`further
`
`comprising displaying a table comprising rows each containing textual information about
`
`a different one of a plurality of recent sales of nearby properties,
`
`and wherein the owner identifies each recent sale of a nearby property regarded by the
`
`owner as similar to the distinguished property by interaction with the row containing
`
`information about the sale. (see Fig. 12 disclosing similar properties and their attributes)
`
`Regarding claim 14:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests that the computer-readable medium of claim 2 wherein the
`
`adjustment of the obtained user input includes identifying nearby properties regarded by
`
`the owner as similar to the distinguished property, and wherein the displayed refined
`
`valuation is based at least in part on a repetition of the automatic valuation of the
`
`distinguished property in which the influence of values for the identified sales properties
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`is magnified. (see at least col. 8, lines 20-40 disclosing similar houses; col. 12, lines 62-
`
`65 and col. 13, lines 1 -20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new
`
`evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 15:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests a method in a computing system for refining an automatic
`
`valuation of a distinguished home based upon input from a user knowledgeable about
`
`the distinguished home, comprising:
`
`obtaining user input adjusting at least one aspect of information about the distinguished
`
`home used in the automatic valuation of the distinguished home; (see at least col. 10,
`
`lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; col. 12,
`
`lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new
`
`evaluation)
`
`automatically determining a refined valuation of the distinguished home that is based on
`
`the adjustment of the obtained user input; and presenting the refined valuation of the
`
`distinguished home. (see at least col. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the
`
`area of a bathroom or bedroom; col. 12, lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose
`
`the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 16:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 15 wherein the presenting involves displaying
`
`the refined valuation of the distinguished home to a user providing the user input. (see
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 13
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`at least col. 12, lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system that
`
`creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 1 7:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 15 wherein the presenting involves displaying
`
`the refined valuation of the distinguished home to a user other than the user providing
`
`the user input. col. 12, lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion
`
`system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 18:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 15 wherein the automatic valuation of the
`
`distinguished home involves applying a geographically-specific home valuation model to
`
`attributes indicated by an external data source to be possessed by the distinguished
`
`home,
`
`and wherein the adjustment of the obtained user input includes altering the home
`
`attributes indicated by an external data source to be possessed by the distinguished
`
`home, and wherein the determined refined valuation is based at least in part on
`
`applying the geographically-specific home valuation model to the altered attributes. (see
`
`at least col. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or
`
`bedroom; col. 12, lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system
`
`that creates a new evaluation)
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to use Kim to suggest all the features in the claim.
`
`Regarding claim 23:
`
`Khedkar teaches comprising weighting in the
`
`construction of the linear regression-derived function information about recent sales of
`
`individual homes near the distinguished home based upon the extents to which the sold
`
`home and the distinguished home are similar to high-value homes near the
`
`distinguished home. (see at least 00/. 4 lines 1-25 disclosing weighting and 00/. 10, lines
`
`20-55 disclosing homes with different evaluations)
`
`Regarding claim 24:
`
`Khedkar that the method of claim 21, further comprising weighting in the
`
`construction of the linear regression-derived function information about recent sales of
`
`individual homes near the distinguished home based upon the degree of nearness of
`
`each of the sold homes to the distinguished home. (see at least Fig. 6 and col. 9. lines
`
`25-45 disclosing distance and col. 4, lines 1 -25 using weighting with attributes such as
`
`distance)
`
`Regarding claim 25:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 18 wherein the geographically-specific home
`
`valuation model is constrained to consider only home attributes available for alteration
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 15
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`by the user. (see at least col. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a
`
`bathroom or bedroom)
`
`Regarding claim 26:
`
`Khedkar the method of claim 15 wherein the adjustment of the obtained user input
`
`includes adding a description of an improvement to the distinguished home, and
`
`wherein the determined refined valuation is based at least in part on a valuation of the
`
`described improvement. (see at least col. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as
`
`the area of a bathroom or bedroom)
`
`Regarding claim 27:
`
`Khedkar that the method of claim 26 wherein the added improvement description
`
`identifies an improvement type and a cost for the described improvement,
`
`further comprising determining the valuation of the described improvement by applying
`
`a localized improvement cost recovery rate for the identified improvement type to the
`
`identified cost. (see at least col. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of
`
`a bathroom or bedroom; col. 12, lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1 -20 that disclose the
`
`Fusion system that creates a new evaluation))
`
`Regarding claim 28:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 26 wherein the added improvement
`
`description identifies an age of the described improvement and a cost for the described
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 16
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`improvement, further comprising determining the valuation of the described
`
`improvement by applying a depreciation schedule to the identified age and cost. (see at
`
`least 00/. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or
`
`bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system
`
`that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 29:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 15 wherein the adjustment of the obtained
`
`user input includes adding a description of an aspect of the distinguished home not
`
`considered by the automatic valuation of the distinguished home and an estimate by a
`
`user providing the user input of its value, and wherein the determined refined valuation
`
`is based at least in part on the estimate of the value of the described aspect. (see at
`
`least 00/. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or
`
`bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system
`
`that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 30:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 15 wherein the automatic valuation of the
`
`distinguished home involves applying a geographically-specific home valuation model to
`
`attributes indicated by an external data source to be possessed by the distinguished
`
`home, and wherein the adjustment of the obtained user input includes identifying recent
`
`sales of nearby homes regarded as similar to the distinguished home, the method
`
`further comprising:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 17
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`constructing a new geographically-specific home valuation model that emphasizes the
`
`significance of the identified sales; (see at least 00/. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes
`
`such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65 and 00/. 13, lines 1 -20
`
`that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)) and
`
`applying the constructed new geographically-specific home valuation model to attributes
`
`of the distinguished home to obtain a result, and wherein the determined refined
`
`valuation is based at least in part on the obtained result. (see at least 00/. 10, lines 20-
`
`50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65
`
`and 00/. 13, lines 1 -20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 31:
`
`Khedkar that the method of claim 30 wherein the constructed new geographically-
`
`specific home valuation model is applied to attributes indicated by the external data
`
`source to be possessed by the distinguished home. (see at least 00/. 10, lines 20-50
`
`disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; 00/. 12, lines 62-65
`
`and 00/. 13, lines 1 -20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 32:
`
`Khedkar that the method of claim 30 wherein the adjustment of the obtained user input
`
`further includes altering the home attributes indicated by the external data source to be
`
`possessed by the distinguished home, and wherein the constructed new geographically-
`
`specific home valuation model is applied to altered attributes. (see at least 00/. 10, lines
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 18
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; col. 12, lines 62-
`
`65 and col. 13, lines 1 -20 that disclose the Fusion system that creates a new
`
`evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 33:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 30 wherein adjustment of the obtained user
`
`input further includes identifying a scoring of the homes sold in the identified sales
`
`reflecting the relative level of similarity of the sold homes to the distinguished home, and
`
`wherein the constructed new geographically-specific home valuation model emphasizes
`
`the significance of the identified sales in a manner consistent with the identified scoring.
`
`(see at least col. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such as the area of a bathroom or
`
`bedroom; col. 12, lines 62-65 and col. 13, lines 1-20 that disclose the Fusion system
`
`that creates a new evaluation)
`
`Regarding claim 34:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 30, further comprising:
`
`among the identified recent sales of nearby homes regarded as similar to the
`
`distinguished home, determining an average selling price per square foot; (see at least
`
`col. 10 lines 40-50 disclosing square footage)
`
`multiplying the determined average selling price per square foot by the floor area of the
`
`distinguished home to obtain an alternate valuation of the distinguished home; and
`
`before presenting the refined valuation of the distinguished home, blending into the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 19
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`refined valuation of the distinguished home the obtained alternate valuation. (see at
`
`least col. 10 lines 40-50 disclosing square footage and col. 13, lines1-20 disclosing the
`
`Fusion system that blends the valuations)
`
`Regarding claim 35:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests that the method of claim 30 wherein the constructed new
`
`geographically-specific home valuation model also emphasizes the significance of sales
`
`of homes whose locations are determined to be near the location of the distinguished
`
`home. (see fig. 6 disclosing distance from the house and col. 9 lines 30-55 explaining
`
`various attributes including distance)
`
`Regarding claim 36:
`
`Khedkar teaches that the method of claim 35 further comprising determining that the
`
`location of a home recently sold is near the location of the distinguished home if it has
`
`the same zip code as the distinguished home. (see fig. 6 disclosing distance from the
`
`house and col. 9 lines 30-55 explaining various attributes including distance)
`
`Regarding claim 37:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests that the method of claim 35 further comprising determining
`
`that the location of a home recently sold is near the location of the distinguished home if
`
`it has the same neighborhood name as the distinguished home. (see fig. 6 disclosing
`
`distance from the house and col. 9 lines 30-55 explaining various attributes including
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 11/347,024
`
`Page 20
`
`Art Unit: 3694
`
`distance)
`
`Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to use Kim to suggest all the features in the claim.
`
`Regarding claim 38:
`
`Khedkar teaches/suggests that the method of claim 30, further comprising:
`
`accessing a floor area attribute of the distinguished home and the nearby
`
`homes whose recent sales were identified, and a selling price for each of the identified
`
`sales; (see at least col. 8 lines 30-55 disclosing other properties)
`
`determining among the identified sales a selling price per square foot metric;
`
`multiplying the obtained selling price per square foot metric by the floor area of the
`
`distinguished home to obtain a product; (see at least col. 10 lines 40-50 disclosing
`
`square footage)and
`
`combining the product with the result to obtain the determined refined
`
`valuation. (see at least col. 9, lines 35-45; col. 10, lines 20-50 disclosing attributes such
`
`as the area of a bathroom or bedroom; col. 12, lines 62-65