IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Examiner: Nguyen, Maikhanh
`
`In Re:
`Case:
`
`Ramakrishna Satyavolu
`P3977CIP
`
`Serial No.:
`Filed:
`
`11/293,350
`12/01/2005
`
`Subject:
`
`Categorization of Summarized Information
`
`Commissioner for Patent
`
`PO Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Dear Sir:
`
`Response G
`
`(cid:20)
`1
`
`(cid:51)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:22)
`Plaid 1033
`
`
`
`Art Unit: 2176
`
`Examiner: Nguyen, Maikhanh
`
`In Re:
`Case:
`
`Ramakrishna Satyavolu
`P3977CIP
`
`Serial No.:
`Filed:
`
`11/293,350
`12/01/2005
`
`Subject:
`
`Categorization of Summarized Information
`
`Commissioner for Patent
`
`PO Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Dear Sir:
`
`Response G
`
`(cid:20)
`1
`
`(cid:51)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:76)(cid:71)(cid:3)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:22)(cid:22)
`Plaid 1033
`
`
`
`In the claims:
`
`All of the claims standing for examination are presented below with appropriate status
`
`indication.
`
`1. (Previously presented) A system tangibly embodied on a computer-readable medium
`
`for sorting and reporting transaction information, comprising;
`
`a collection function navigating to and retrieving transaction information
`
`associated with a specific person or enterprise from third-party Internet-connected web
`
`sites, the transaction information including at least date, description and amount of the
`
`transactions;
`
`an input function enabling a client to provide to the system a request for a
`
`summary of transactions over a specific range of dates, according to a definition of
`
`purpose of transaction;
`
`a processing function parsing the collected transaction descriptions for purpose,
`
`using pre-stored description characteristics associated with purpose, and summarizing
`
`those transactions that meet the purpose and fall into the date range; and
`
`a reporting function for providing the summarized transactions to the specific
`
`person or enterprise.
`
`2. (Previously presented) The system of claim l wherein the reporting function provides a
`
`total transaction expenditure amount with the summarized transactions.
`
`3-4. (Cancelled)
`
`5. (Previously presented) The system of claim l wherein a summary is provided for a first
`
`plurality of persons or enterprises subscribing to the system according to requests entered
`
`by a second plurality of persons or enterprises subscribing to the system.
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`6. (Previously presented) The system of claim 1 wherein description characteristics are
`
`developed from information taken from communication between clients and the system.
`
`7. (Previously presented) The system of claim 6 wherein a probability algorithm is used
`
`in developing description characteristics.
`
`8. (Previously presented) The system of claim 1 wherein description characteristics are
`
`periodically amended according to further information that is collected and processed.
`
`9. (Canceled)
`
`10. (Previously presented) The system of claim 1 wherein the system reports to clients
`
`through the Internet network.
`
`ll. (Original) The system of claim 2 wherein the system further comprises a function
`
`storing past transaction history associated with the particular person or enterprise.
`
`12. (Previously presented) The system of claim ll wherein the past transaction history is
`
`used to predict future transaction statistical information.
`
`13. (Currently amended) A method for sorting and reporting transaction information
`
`using proprietary software tangibly embodied on a computer-readable medium,
`
`comprising:
`
`(a) automatically navigating to and retrieving transaction information associated
`
`with a specific person or enterprise from third-party Intemet-connected web sites and
`
`gathering information concerning transactions by a collection function of the software
`
`said information including at least date, description and amount of the transactions;
`
`
`
`-4-
`
`(b) requesting a summary of transactions by a client via an input function of the
`
`software over a specific range of dates, according to a definition of purpose of
`
`transactions;
`
`(c) parsing the collected transaction descriptions for purpose, via a processing
`
`function of the software using pre-stored description characteristics associated with
`
`purpose, and summarizing those transactions that meet the purpose and fall into the date
`
`range; and
`
`[[(c)]] (d)_reporting the summarized transactions to the particular person or
`
`enterprise by a reporting function.
`
`l4. (Previously presented) The method of claim l3 wherein the reporting function
`
`provides a total transaction expenditure amount with the summarized transactions.
`
`l5-l6. (Cancelled)
`
`l7. (Previously presented) The method of claim l3 wherein a summary is provided for a
`
`first plurality of persons or enterprises according to category definition entered by a
`
`second plurality of persons or enterprises.
`
`l8. (Previously presented) The method of claim l3 wherein description characteristics are
`
`developed from information taken from communication between clients and the system.
`
`19. (Previously presented) The method of claim 18 wherein a probability algorithm is
`
`used in developing description characteristics.
`
`20. (Previously presented) The method of claim l3 wherein description characteristics are
`
`periodically amended according to further information that is collected and processed.
`
`21. (Canceled)
`
`
`
`22. (Previously presented) The method of claim 13 wherein the system reports to clients
`
`through the Internet network.
`
`23. (Original) The method of claim 14 wherein the method further comprises a step for
`
`storing past transaction history associated with the particular person or enterprise.
`
`24. (Previously presented) The method of claim 23 wherein the past transaction history is
`
`used to predict future transaction statistical information.
`
`
`
`-6-
`
`Remarks
`
`The present Response is to the Office Action mailed 03/31/2009. Claims 1, 2, 5-8,
`
`10-14, 17-20, and 22-24 are presented for examination.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 10-14, 17, 18, 20 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
`
`102(e) as being anticipated by Schrader et al. (US 5903881 A — filed
`
`06/05/1997).
`
`The Examiner states:
`
`As to claim 13:
`
`Schrader teaches a method for sorting and reporting transaction information using
`
`proprietary software tangibly embodied on a computer-readable medium [The
`
`personal online finance software product executes on client or user computer and
`
`is coupled over a network to a computer system of a bank or otherfinancial
`
`institution; See Col. 7, lines 59-64. See also, Fig. 7], comprising:
`
`0
`
`automatically navigating to and retrieving transaction information associated with
`
`a specific person or enterprise from third-party Intemet-connected web sites and
`
`gathering information concerning transactions by a collection function of the
`
`software, said information including at least date, description and amount of the
`
`transactions [The personal onlinefinance software product executes on client or
`
`user computer and is coupled over a network to a computer system ofa bank or
`
`otherfinancial institution...Most transaction instructions I 69 will include a
`
`description I 72 and an amount I 73...Each transaction 180 is listed with
`
`descriptive information about the transactions. This information preferably
`
`includes the transaction date 183, transaction type 185, an amount 19], and a
`
`description I 8 7 which identifies typically the payee or other useful information.,'
`
`See Col. 7, lines 61-64; Col. 8, lines 26-37; and ol.9, lines 6- I4];
`
`
`
`Applicant responds
`
`Applicant respectfully disagrees that Schrader teaches automatically navigating to
`
`and retrieving transaction information. Applicant argues that a personal online finance
`
`software product of Schrader, which executes on client or user computer and is coupled
`
`over a network to a computer system of a bank or other financial institution, cannot
`
`possibly read on applicant’s clear limitation of software for automatically navigating to
`
`and retrieving transaction information from a plurality of Web sites.
`
`The Examiner continues, stating Schrader teaches
`
`0
`
`requesting a summary of transactions by a client via an input function of the
`
`software over a specific range of dates, according to a definition of purpose of
`
`transactions [Fig. 6 shows an interface for downloading an account history
`
`information associated with an individual. Ifa client wants "to download a
`
`shorter range than shown, enter the From and To dates", the interface allows the
`
`client to request his/her account history information by entering a date range; See
`
`also, Col. 10, line 33—Col. 11, line 14];
`
`Applicant responds
`
`Applicant argues that Schrader is limited to requesting transactions according to
`
`date range, only, and fails to teach requesting a summary of transactions according to
`
`purpose, as claimed. Applicant’s claim 13, clearly recites that not only does the user
`
`request a summary of transactions according to date, but also according to a definition of
`
`purpose of transactions. Applicant points out that purpose refers to a reason for
`
`transaction as understood by those with skill in the art and as taught in applicant’s
`
`invention. The Examiner may not simply ignore this clear limitation when rejecting
`
`applicant’s claims.
`
`
`
`-8-
`
`The Examiner continues, stating Schrader teaches
`
`parsing the collected transaction descriptions for purpose, Via a processing
`
`function of the software using pre-stored description characteristics associated
`
`with purpose [Fig. 6 shows an interface for downloading an account history
`
`information associated with an individual. When "the date range" is entered and
`
`the "Download" button is clicked, a summary ofthe transactions within the date
`
`range will be generatedfor downloading/displaying; See also, Col. 10, line 33-
`
`Col. 11, line 14]; and
`
`Applicant responds
`
`As argued above, “a date range” as taught in Schrader cannot read on “purpose”
`
`as taught and claimed in applicant’s invention. Further, applicant points out that the
`
`claim recites; “parsing the collected transaction descriptions for purpose, Via a processing
`
`function of the software using pre-stored description characteristics associated with
`
`purpose, and summarizing those transactions that meet the purpose and fall into the date
`
`range” The Examiner has not addressed the claim limitation including pre-stored
`
`description characteristics associated with purpose. Therefore, Schrader fails to teach
`
`this limitation.
`
`The Examiner continues, stating Schrader teaches
`
`summarizing those transactions that meet the purpose and fall into the date range;
`
`and reporting the summarized transactions to the particular person or enterprise
`
`by a reporting function [A report generation module generates reports, such as
`
`summaries ofthe transactions, by date; See Col. l3, lines 42-44. See also, Fig. 6
`
`shows an interface for downloading an account history. The interface allows
`
`downloading the account information associated with an individual by entering
`
`"the From and To dates". When "the date range" is entered and the "Download"
`
`button is clicked, a summary of the transactions within the date range will be
`
`downloaded and displayed].
`
`
`
`Applicant responds
`
`As argued above, “a date range” as taught in Schrader cannot read on “purpose”
`
`as taught and claimed in applicant’s invention.
`
`As to claim 17:
`
`Schrader teaches summary is provided for a first plurality of persons or enterprises
`
`according to category definition entered by a second plurality of persons or enterprises [A
`
`transaction instruction l69 is a description ofan action to be performed by afinancial
`
`institution or otherfinancial entity or a requestfor information from afinancial
`
`institution. Afinancial institution may be the user's bank, a clearinghouse, or other
`
`institution which processes electronic transactions, transfers, or otherwise is involved in
`
`the handling of transaction instructions or user's accounts, payments, orfund transfers
`
`For example, for a bill payment transaction instruction (here indicated as ’'Send9
`
`in ormation such as the payee of a bill payment is provided. In FIG. 7, the transaction
`
`instruction l69 of "Send Pacific Gas & Elec. $54.94" is a bill payment instruction; See
`
`Col. 8, lines 11-64].
`
`Applicant’s response
`
`Applicant respectfully requests further explanation fiom the Examiner as to
`
`specifically what in the above teaching of bill pay in Schrader refers to a first plurality of
`
`persons or enterprises; which part of Schrader’s teaching specifically refers to
`
`“according to category definition” as claimed, and which entity is identified as the second
`
`plurality of persons or enterprises. The presentation by the Examiner of Schrader cannot
`
`be clearly understood by applicant.
`
`As to claim 18:
`
`Schrader teaches description characteristics are developed from information taken from
`
`communication between clients and the system [A financial institution may be the user's
`
`
`
`-10-
`
`bank, a clearinghouse, or other institution which processes electronic transactions,
`
`transfers, or otherwise is involved in the handling oftransaction instructions or user's
`
`accounts, payments, orfund transfers
`
`the out box 167 is used to show bill payments to
`
`various merchants andfund transfers between user selected accounts,‘ See Col. 8, line 11
`
`— 64].
`
`Applicant responds
`
`Claim 18 refers to the pre-stored description characteristics associated with
`
`purpose of claim 13. Therefore, the claim is interpreted as the pre-stored description
`
`characteristics are developed from communication between clients and the system. As
`
`the Examiner has failed to show the pre-stored description characteristics, as claimed, the
`
`art fails to teach or suggest the limitations of claim 18.
`
`Applicant responds generally to the balance of the claim rejections in that it is
`
`clear the Examiner is taking an overly and unreasonably broad interpretation of the art in
`
`the present Office Action. Applicant claims parsing and summarizing transaction
`
`according to criteria in addition to date range including at least parsing the collected
`
`transaction descriptions for purpose, via a processing function of the software using pre-
`
`stored description characteristics associated with purpose, and summarizing those
`
`transactions that meet the purpose and fall into the date range. The Examiner has not
`
`adequately shown where or how this is accomplished in Schrader.
`
`Applicant believes claim 13 is patentable as argued above. Claim 1 includes
`
`limitations argued on behalf of claim l3 and is patentable over Schrader for at least those
`
`arguments. Claims 2, 5-12, l4, l7-20 and 22-24 are patentable on their own merits, as
`
`argued above, or at least as depended from a patentable claim.
`
`
`
`-11-
`
`Summary
`
`As all of the claims, as argued above, have been shown to be patentable over the
`
`art presented by the Examiner, applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and the
`
`case be passed quickly to issue.
`
`If any fees are due beyond fees paid with this amendment, authorization is made
`
`to deduct those fees from deposit account 50-0534. If any time extension is needed
`
`beyond any extension requested with this amendment, such extension is hereby
`
`requested.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`Ramakrishna Satyavolu
`
`By [.?)ana€d KR. 93%]
`Donald R. Boys
`Reg. No. 35,074
`
`Central Coast Patent Agency, Inc.
`3 Hangar Way, Suite D
`Watsonville CA 95076
`
`(831)768-1755
`
`
`
`Electronic Acknowledgement Receipt
`
`International Application Number:
`
`Title of Invention:
`
`Categorization of summarized information
`
`First Named Inventor/Applicant Name:
`
`Application Type:
`
`Utilnty under 35 USC111(a)
`
`Payment information:
`
`File Listing:
`
`Document
`Number
`
`Document Description
`
`File Size(Bytes)/
`Message Digest
`
`Pages
`Multi
`Part /.zip (if appl.)
`
`132227
`
`
`
`Amend ment/Req. Reconsideration-After
`Non-Final Reject
`
`4943oar7'pdf
`
`3e9372cd93bb65573c939535f3e53e28f42
`3033a
`
`Information.
`
`(cid:20)(cid:21)
`
`12
`
`
`
`Total Files Size (in bytes)
`
`132227
`
`This Acknowledgement Receipt evidences receipt on the noted date by the USPTO ofthe indicated documents,
`characterized by the applicant, and including page counts, where applicable. It serves as evidence of receipt similar to a
`Post Card, as described in MPEP 503.
`
`New Applications Under 35 U.S.C. 111
`lfa new application is being filed and the application includes the necessary components for a filing date (see 37 CFR
`1.53(b)-(d) and MPEP 506), a Filing Receipt (37 CFR 1.54) will be issued in due course and the date shown on this
`Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the filing date of the application.
`
`National Stage of an International Application under 35 U.S.C. 371
`lfa timely submission to enter the national stage of an international application is compliant with the conditions of 35
`U.S.C. 371 and other applicable requirements a Form PCT/DO/E0/903 indicating acceptance of the application as a
`national stage submission under 35 U.S.C. 371 will be issued in addition to the Filing Receipt, in due course.
`
`New International Application Filed with the USPTO as a Receiving Office
`lfa new international application is being filed and the international application includes the necessary components for
`an international filing date (see PCT Article 11 and MPEP 1810), a Notification of the International Application Number
`and ofthe International Filing Date (Form PCT/R0/105) will be issued in due course, subject to prescriptions concerning
`national security, and the date shown on this Acknowledgement Receipt will establish the international filing date of
`the application.
`
`(cid:20)(cid:22)
`
`13
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
