Peer To Patent

Pre-Grant Publication Number: 20080319847

Collaborate on the process of community review for this application. Posting will not be forwarded to the USPTO. Flagging a post as an ACTION ITEM signals further research. Flagging SPAM and ABUSE helps to manage discussion. Placing double brackets around a reference to a claim or prior art will create a hyperlink to the original ex. [[claim 1]] and [[prior art 2]].

Please review the Community Code of Conduct prior to posting

Discussion (3)

View: Date|Claims|Prior Art|Action Item|

Facilitator's Comment

Action Item

Show without Noise

Susan Murray (over 4 years ago)

David - If you want to be of assistance to the PTO, you need to show (not just assert) anticipation or obviousness by submitting (on the "Prior Art" page) an actual reference with a publication date that preceeds the priority date of this application. Feel free to give me a call if you want to discuss. Susan

David Kumhyr (over 4 years ago)

Regarding Claim 00002 With reference to my comment on Claim 1 wherein what is described is a interface that is detached from the processing program as a simple distributed computing application. This claim adds passing data between the two portions of the distributed application. There is no enhanced or non-obvious benefit that derives from this, so again I'd argue that this is simply what all distributed applications do.

David Kumhyr (over 4 years ago)

If we call a 'loyalty system' a computer application, which it seems to be simply a specific use case for an application; and look at Claim 1 (as well as all of the independent claims) we end up with the description: "An interface module that receives input that send the data to a processing network"

Which has no unique and non-obvious properties. It is simply claiming a distributed computer application. This is a well established design pattern for general computer applications. The limited specificity of stating that it is a 'loyalty application' doesn't alter the function nor add any non-obvious benefit that isn't already encapsulated in the established art of distributed systems.

The dependent claims further specify the type 'loyalty' of data transferred, but again this is just a payload transferred by the distributed application from one portion of the processing system to another. The type of data nor the transfer of that data neither impart any unique property to the system at all. I'd argue that this is quite simply obvious.

0 days left