101 Rejection Reference Database – Art Unit 3694

Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security and License & Review

Examiner: Anderson John

Patent AssigneePatent Application
United Services Automobile Association USAA15/353760

Systems and methods for adaptive learning to replicate peak performance of human decision making

Patent Abstract

This patent discloses a computer apparatus capable of assisting users with financial transactions by scanning the internet for similar transactions and providing users with recommendations based on the data collected. The apparatus then analyzes the users health condition to determine if the requested transaction aligns with their prior financial history, and can decline the transaction if the users past financial transactions are not similar to the requested transaction.

Reason for 101 Rejection | CTFR 1/10/2020

The claims are directed to a system of an evaluation of user performance prior to facilitating a transaction. The claim elements used to implement this apparatus amount to no more than generic computing components that do not improve the functioning of a computer device or integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The specification does not provide any improved computer or technology but rather generally applies the abstract idea to generic computers.

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 Rejection | REM 4/10/2020

For step 1, the applicant submits that the claims are directed to a computer-implemented apparatus for evaluating the fitness of a user before proceeding with a financial transaction. The applicant submits that for example, the evaluation of mental fitness cannot reasonably be interpreted as a method of organizing human activity, such as fundamental economic practices. The 2019 Guidelines state that anything that does not fall within the enumerated groupings should not be treated as reciting abstract ideas, therefore the claims are directed to patent eligible subject matter. The claim integrates any judicial exception into practical application at least because the system is directed to eliminate the likelihood that individuals with mental health disorders make poor financial decisions.

Examiner: Anderson John

Patent AssigneePatent Application

System and method for dynamic risk management

Patent Abstract

This patent discloses a system of a network interface capable of retrieving a users investment portfolio data. The users investment portfolio is then analyzed to assess potential future investment risks and generate a glide path map for the user. The risk factors are analyzed by the system to determine the future date and strength of the plurality of risk factors. The glide maps provide a visual representation of the change in allocation ratios of the users’ investments over time to mitigate the identified potential risks.

Reason for 101 Rejection | CTFR 12/11/2019

The system in the broadest reasonable interpretation can be performed by the mind or by a human analog, therefore it covers a performance of a certain method of organizing human activity. The additional limitations of identifying risk factors do not amount to significant more than the judicial exception and fail to integrate it into a practical application beyond the use of a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 Rejection | REM 1/28/2020

During the interview it was discussed how to properly amend the independent claims to further clarify that the processor is configured to calculate risk for the investment portfolio based on specific parameters. The claims have been amended to reflect that the generated glide map is in the centralized location of the system, thereby improving the overall efficiency of the system.

Examiner: Anderson John

Patent AssigneePatent Application
Wells Fargo15/146406

Monitored alerts

Patent Abstract

This patent claims a method of delivering customized alerts to users based on a plurality of parameters.The system analyzed a plurality of indicators associated with the user to identify underlying subject topics. Once the subject topics have been identified for a particular user the system then determines the most effective means of distributing content tothe user associated with the users subject matter topics.

Reason for 101 Rejection | CTFR 8/8/2019

The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Other than reciting a processor the claim amounts to no more than comparing two parameters that will trigger an established alert system when the parameters meet certain criteria. The method claimed is consistent with commercial transactions and therefore the claims are directed to an abstract idea under certain methods of organizing human activity. Only the generic use of a processor to conduct comparisons does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.

Remarks on Overcoming the 101 Rejection | REM 10/31/2019

The present claims are directed to practical applications of any abstract idea. The method of determining when to notify a user improves the functioning of a computer system as it improves on portfolio management systems by enabling the additional consideration of additional factors about the client to better offer service to them. Since the claims recite a practical application of any such abstract concept, they are patentable and not directed to any abstract idea.