Patent Application 18450623 - SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING A USER

Title: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING A USER INTERFACE FOR AN ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS PLATFORM

Application Information

Invention Title: SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING A USER INTERFACE FOR AN ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS PLATFORM
Application Number: 18450623
Submission Date: 2025-05-16T00:00:00.000Z
Effective Filing Date: 2023-08-16T00:00:00.000Z
Filing Date: 2023-08-16T00:00:00.000Z
National Class: 705
National Sub-Class: 027200
Examiner Employee Number: 93469
Art Unit: 3689
Tech Center: 3600

Rejection Summary

102 Rejections: 0
103 Rejections: 3

Cited Patents

The following patents were cited in the rejection:

Office Action Text

DETAILED ACTION
This action is in reply to the original application filed on 08/16/2023.
Claims 1-20 are cancelled
Claims 21-40 are rejected.
Claims 21-40 are currently pending and have been examined.

Priority
The current Application is a CON of US Patent No. 11,776,048, which is a CON of US Patent No. 11,481,833 filed 05/21/2021. Therefore, the instant claims receive the effective filing date of 05/21/2021.

Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement received 08/16/2023 has been reviewed and considered.

Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .

Claim Objections
Claims 21-40 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claims 21, 34, and 38 read “generating … a user interface for an electronic transactions platform” but should likely read “generating … the user interface for the electronic transactions platform”
Claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40 inherit the deficiencies noted in claims 21, 34, and 38, and are therefore objected to on the same basis.
Appropriate correction is required.

Examiner note regarding Double Patenting:
Regarding US Patent No. 11,776,048 and US Patent No. 11,481,833, which are Parents of the current Application, there is no double patenting as US Patent No. 11,776,048 and US Patent No. 11,481,833 are distinct inventions from the current claims. Specifically, neither US Patent No. 11,776,048 or US Patent No. 11,481,833 recite “in response to reserving the selected wearable article, displaying, by the one or more processors, a reservation success panel on the user interface, wherein the reservation success panel indicates that the selected wearable article will be reserved for the predetermined period of time.”

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.

Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Under Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test for Products and Processes, the claims must be directed to one of the four statutory categories. All the claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories (YES).

Under Step 2A in MPEP 2106.04, it is determined whether the claims are directed to a judicially recognized exception. Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry.

Under Prong 1, it is determined whether the claim recites a judicial exception (YES). Taking Claim 21 as representative, the claim recites limitations that fall within the certain methods of organizing human activity groupings of abstract ideas, including:
-generating, by one or more processors, a user interface [display] for an electronic transactions platform based on one or more wearable articles, wherein the one or more wearable articles are based on wearable article data received from one or more electronic entity interfaces corresponding to one or more entities;
-receiving, by the one or more processors, a selection of a wearable article of the one or more wearable articles via the user interface;
-reserving, by the one or more processors, the selected wearable article for a predetermined period of time; and
-in response to reserving the selected wearable article, displaying, by the one or more processors, a reservation success panel on the user interface, wherein the reservation success panel indicates that the selected wearable article will be reserved for the predetermined period of time

The above limitations recite the concept of selecting and reserving one or more wearable articles for a predetermined period of time. The above limitations fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas, enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a).

Certain methods of organizing human activity include:
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, and mitigating risk)
commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; and business relations)
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)

The limitations of generating, by one or more processors, a user interface [display] for an electronic transactions platform based on one or more wearable articles, wherein the one or more wearable articles are based on wearable article data received from one or more electronic entity interfaces corresponding to one or more entities; receiving, by the one or more processors, a selection of a wearable article of the one or more wearable articles via the user interface; reserving, by the one or more processors, the selected wearable article for a predetermined period of time; and in response to reserving the selected wearable article, displaying, by the one or more processors, a reservation success panel on the user interface, wherein the reservation success panel indicates that the selected wearable article will be reserved for the predetermined period of time are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover a commercial interaction. That is, other than reciting that the generating is of a user interface by one or more processors, that the transactions platform is electronic, that the wearable article data is received from one or more electronic entity interfaces, that the receiving of a selection is by the one or more processors, that the selection is via the user interface, that the reserving is by the one or more processors, that the displaying is by the one or more processors, and that the reservation success panel is on the user interface nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed by people. For example, but for the “one or more processors,” “user interface,” “electronic,” and “one or more electronic entity interfaces” language, “generating,” “receiving,” “reserving,” and “displaying” in the context of this claim encompasses advertising, and marketing or sales activities.

Under Prong 2, it is determined whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application (NO).
-generating, by one or more processors, a user interface for an electronic transactions platform based on one or more wearable articles, wherein the one or more wearable articles are based on wearable article data received from one or more electronic entity interfaces corresponding to one or more entities;
-receiving, by the one or more processors, a selection of a wearable article of the one or more wearable articles via the user interface;
-reserving, by the one or more processors, the selected wearable article for a predetermined period of time; and
-in response to reserving the selected wearable article, displaying, by the one or more processors, a reservation success panel on the user interface, wherein the reservation success panel indicates that the selected wearable article will be reserved for the predetermined period of time These limitations are not indicative of integration into a practical application because:
The additional elements of claim 21 are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as generic computing hardware) such that they amount to nothing more than mere instructions to implement or apply the abstract idea on a generic computing hardware (or, merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea) as supported by paragraph [0151] of Applicant’s specification – “CPU 1020 may be any type of processor device including, for example, any type of special purpose or a general-purpose microprocessor device.” Specifically, the additional elements of a computer-implemented method, a user interface, an electronic transactions platform, one or more processors, and one or more electronic entity interfaces are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e. as a generic processor performing the generic computer functions of generating data, receiving data, reserving data, and displaying data) such that they amount do no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. Further, the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (such as computers or computing networks). For example, stating that the method is computer-implemented only generally links the commercial interactions to a computer environment. Employing well-known computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment, does not integrate the exception into a practical application.

Additionally, the additional elements are insufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because the claim fails to i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, ii) apply the judicial exception with, or use the judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or iv) apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.

Under Step 2B, it is determined whether the claims recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims of the present application do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (NO).

In the case of claim 21, taken individually or as a whole, the additional elements of claim 21 do not provide an inventive concept. As discussed above under step 2A (prong 2) with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements used to perform the claimed functions amount to no more than a general link to a technological environment.

Even considered as an ordered combination (as a whole), the additional elements do not add anything significantly more than when considered individually.

Claim 34 is a computer system reciting similar functions as claim 21. Examiner notes that claim 34 recites the additional elements of a computer system, a user interface, an electronic transactions platform, a memory having processor-readable instructions stored therein, one or more processors configured to access the memory and execute the processor-readable instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors configures the one or more processors to perform a plurality of functions, and one or more electronic entity interfaces, however, claim 34 does not qualify as eligible subject matter for similar reasons as claim 21 indicated above.

Claim 38 is a non-transitory computer-readable medium reciting similar functions as claim 21. Examiner notes that claim 38 recites the additional elements of a non-transitory computer-readable medium, a user interface, an electronic transactions platform, one or more processors, and one or more electronic entity interfaces, however, claim 38 does not qualify as eligible subject matter for similar reasons as claim 21 indicated above.

Even considered as an ordered combination (as a whole), the additional elements do not add anything significantly more than when considered individually.

Therefore, claims 34 and 38 do not provide an inventive concept and do not qualify as eligible subject matter.

Dependent claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40, when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they do not add “significantly more” to the abstract idea. More specifically, dependent claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40 further fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas in that they recite commercial interactions. Dependent claim 26, does not recite any farther additional elements, and as such are not indicative of integration into a practical application for at least similar reasons discussed above. Dependent claims 22-25, 27-33, 35-37, and 39-40 recite the additional elements of the user interface, the one or more processors, an API call, an external system, the electronic transactions platform, a data analytics system, and a current status user interface, but similar to the analysis under prong two of Step 2A these additional elements are used as a tool to perform the abstract idea. As such, under prong two of Step 2A, claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40 are not indicative of integration into a practical application for at least similar reasons as discussed above. Thus, dependent claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40 are “directed to” an abstract idea. Next, under Step 2B, similar to the analysis of claims 21, 34, and 38, dependent claims 22-33, 35-37, and 39-40 when analyzed individually and as an ordered combination, merely further define the commonplace business method (i.e. selecting and reserving one or more wearable articles for a predetermined period of time) being applied on a general-purpose computer and, therefore, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the Examiner concludes that there are no meaningful limitations in the claims that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. The analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.

The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 21-26 and 32-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moss et al. (US 2013/0151371 A1), hereinafter Moss, in view of Faris et al. (US 2015/0205894 A1), hereinafter Faris.
Examiner notes that clear drawings of Faris have been attached.
Regarding claim 21, Moss discloses a computer-implemented method for providing a user interface to a user for an electronic transactions platform, the method comprising:
-generating, by one or more processors, a user interface for an electronic transactions platform based on one or more wearable articles, wherein the one or more wearable articles are based on wearable article data received from one or more electronic entity interfaces corresponding to one or more entities (Moss, see at least: “execution of the product detail module 202 can be configured to provide a user interface (e.g., a website) for the customer with various product details, including information about clothing items, i.e., what they are (e.g., a dress, a top, a skirt, jeans, etc.) [i.e. generating, by one or more processors, a user interface for an electronic transactions platform based on one or more wearable articles]. The module 202 can include a listing of items on the user interface (e.g., website) from which the user can select particular items of interest” [0023] and “The system 100 can include a provider of clothing items 102 and at least one customer 104 communicating through a communications network 106[i.e. wherein the one or more wearable articles are based on wearable article data received from one or more electronic entity interfaces corresponding to one or more entities] … The customer 104 can request rental of a clothing item for a predetermined period of time (e.g., a day, a week, a month, a year, and/or any other period of time) and then return the item after expiration of that predetermined period of time. The customer 104 can also request a purchase of the rented item from the provider 102 after expiration of the predetermined period of time. The customer 104 can also purchase of the item without rental of the item from the provider 102 [i.e. an electronic transactions platform based on one or more wearable articles]” [0020]);
-receiving, by the one or more processors, a selection of a wearable article of the one or more wearable articles via the user interface (Moss, see at least: “execution of the product detail module 202 [i.e. by the one or more processors] can be configured to provide a user interface (e.g., a website) for the customer with various product details, including information about clothing items, i.e., what they are (e.g., a dress, a top, a skirt, jeans, etc.). [i.e. a wearable article of the one or more wearable articles] The module 202 can include a listing of items on the user interface (e.g., website) from which the user can select particular items of interest. Once a customer 104 (not shown in FIG. 2) has selected a particular item of interest [i.e. receiving a selection of a wearable article of the one or more wearable articles via the user interface], the product detail module 202 can be configured to interact with color selection module 204, the size selection module 206, and optionally with second size selection module 208. These modules can be triggered upon customer's selection of a particular item from the user interface” [0023])
-reserving, by the one or more processors, the selected wearable article for a predetermined period of time (Moss, see at least: “The customer 104 can request rental of a clothing item for a predetermined period of time (e.g., a day, a week, a month, a year, and/or any other period of time) and then return the item after expiration of that predetermined period of time [i.e. reserving the selected wearable article for a predetermined period of time]” [0020] and “One or more of these modules can be implemented in software and/or hardware system that can include at least one processor for executing at least one of these modules [i.e. by the one or more processors]” [0022]); and
-in response to reserving the selected wearable article, displaying, by the one or more processors, a reservation success indication on the user interface, wherein the reservation success indication indicates that the selected wearable article will be reserved for the predetermined period of time (Moss, see at least: “The customer 104 can request rental of a clothing item for a predetermined period of time (e.g., a day, a week, a month, a year, and/or any other period of time) and then return the item after expiration of that predetermined period of time [i.e. in response to reserving the selected wearable article]” [0020] and “the customer interface [i.e. displaying, by the one or more processors] can include an order list screen, a customer order page, and a change status section. In some implementations, the customer order information can be maintained in the order list screen interface. The order list screen can provide information about the order. The information can include at least one of the following, order number, first and last names of the customer, status, products cost value, shipment cost, applicable tax, total cost value of the order, date/time of the order, payment type, shipping information (including different shipping options: overnight, two-day, etc.), date set (whether or not the return date for borrowed clothing has been established) [i.e. wherein the reservation success indication indicates that the selected wearable article will be reserved for the predetermined period of time], postage (whether or not the return postage label has been uploaded), and/or other information. The order page can allow sorting by any of the above categories of information. Searches and/or sorting within each specific category (name, order, number, time, etc.) identified above can also be accomplished. The status of the order can include at least one of the following: confirmed (order has been received and confirmed by a credit card processor) [i.e. a reservation success indication on the user interface], sent (order has been mailed to customer), dry cleaning (order has been returned and the items are currently being cleaned by a dry cleaning service of the provider 102), closed (orders that have been finished and there are no other items outstanding), canceled (order was canceled)” [0031] and “The provider 102 can be configured to send a notification or confirmation to the customer upon addition of new items. The notification can include customer's order tracking information, shipping directions, pictures and/or description of the items in the order, size, color, SKU, quantity, type (rental/purchase), rental period, [i.e. wherein the reservation success indication indicates that the selected wearable article will be reserved for the predetermined period of time] unit price, etc.” [0032]).
Moss does not explicitly disclose the reservation success indication being a reservation success panel.
Faris, however, teaches purchasing a product online (i.e. [0340]), including the known technique of a reservation success panel (Faris, see at least: “FIG. 48 illustrates an end of sale view wherein a user has won an opportunity to purchase a hero product” [0212] and “In one embodiment, such as the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 48, when a user successfully wins a hero product, the app celebrates him with a big congratulations overlay [i.e. a reservation success panel] and a BUY NOW button. He may have minutes (e.g. 10 minutes) to complete the purchase [i.e. reservation]” [0217] and Fig. 48; Examiner notes that “reservation success panel” is interpreted in light of paragraph [0130] and Fig. 7D (which shows the panel is an overlain message) of Applicant’s spec). This known technique is applicable to the method of Moss as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to purchasing a product online.
It would have been recognized that applying the known technique of a reservation success panel, as taught by Faris, to the teachings of Moss would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such references into similar methods. Further, adding the modification of a reservation success panel, as taught by Faris, into the method of Moss would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved method that would create a sense of urgency for the user to buy a product (Faris, [0340]).

Regarding claim 22, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21. Moss further discloses:
-a reservation timer displayed on the user interface (Moss, see at least: “when a customer's order has been delivered, the system 200 can be configured to initiate a clock that can indicate when the customer's rented items may be due for a return [i.e. a reservation timer displayed on the user interface]” [0038]).
Moss does not explicitly disclose the reservation success panel converting to a reservation timer banner at a top of the user interface.
Faris further teaches purchasing a product online (i.e. [0340]), including the known technique of the reservation success panel converting to a reservation timer banner at a top of the user interface (Faris, see at least: “In one embodiment, such as the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 48, when a user successfully wins a hero product, the app celebrates him with a big congratulations overlay [i.e. wherein the reservation success panel] and a BUY NOW button. He may have minutes (e.g. 10 minutes) to complete the purchase” [0217] and “In response to the hero product unlock [i.e. the reservation success panel converts], there may be a countdown widget displayed to indicate to the user that he or she has a predefined period of time (e.g., 10 minutes) to hit the Buy button and checkout, creating a sense of urgency to reserve and buy the hero product. FIG. 16 is one example of a user interface configured in a check out mode [i.e. a reservation timer banner at a top of the user interface]. For instance, if the user does not checkout during the 10 minutes, he or she misses the chance to buy the hero product” [0340] and Figs. 15B-16 show that the interface with the product reveal and ‘buy now’ option is updated to a product detail with a ’timed session’ indication on the top of the interface, as well as, Fig. 26 displaying a countdown timer in a panel at the top of the product detail page [i.e. wherein the reservation success panel converts to a reservation timer banner at a top of the user interface]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Moss with Faris for the reasons identified above with respect to claim 21.

Regarding claim 23, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21.
Moss does not explicitly disclose updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time.
Faris further teaches purchasing a product online (i.e. [0340]), including the known technique of updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time (Faris, see at least: “In one embodiment, such as the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 48, when a user successfully wins a hero product, the app celebrates him with a big congratulations overlay and a BUY NOW button. He may have minutes (e.g. 10 minutes) to complete the purchase” [0217] and “In response to the hero product unlock [i.e. updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface], there may be a countdown widget displayed to indicate to the user that he or she has a predefined period of time (e.g., 10 minutes) to hit the Buy button and checkout, creating a sense of urgency to reserve and buy the hero product. FIG. 16 is one example of a user interface configured in a check out mode. For instance, if the user does not checkout during the 10 minutes [i.e. to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time], he or she misses the chance to buy the hero product” [0340] and Figs. 15B-16 show that the interface with the product reveal and ‘buy now’ option is updated to a product detail with a ’timed session’ indication on the top of the interface, as well as, Fig. 26 displaying a countdown timer in a panel at the top of the product detail page [i.e. updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Moss with Faris for the reasons identified above with respect to claim 21.

Regarding claim 24, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21. Moss further discloses:
-displaying, by the one or more processors, an assessed value on the user interface, the assessed value associated with the user for a daily or weekly period of time (Moss, see at least: “The order list screen can provide information about the order. The information can include at least one of the following, order number, first and last names of the customer, status, products cost value [i.e. displaying, by the one or more processors, an assessed value on the user interface], shipment cost, applicable tax, total cost value of the order, date/time of the order, payment type, shipping information (including different shipping options: overnight, two-day, etc.), date set (whether or not the return date for borrowed clothing has been established), postage (whether or not the return postage label has been uploaded), and/or other information” [0031] and “At 508, if the user desires to rent the clothing, determination can be made whether the clothing is available for rent. At 510 a desired rental period during which the clothing can be rented out to the user can be determined. At 512, the rental cost to the user can be determined based on the determined rental period [i.e. an assessed value, the assessed value associated with the user for a daily or weekly period of time]” [0066] and “The customer 104 can request rental of a clothing item for a predetermined period of time (e.g., a day, a week, a month, a year, and/or any other period of time) [i.e. for a daily or weekly period of time]” [0020]).

Regarding claim 25, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21. Moss further discloses:
-displaying, by the one or more processors, a current status user interface indicating current status information associated with the selected wearable article, the current status information including a current shipment status for the selected wearable article (Moss, see at least: “the customer interface can include an order list screen, a customer order page, and a change status section [i.e. displaying, by the one or more processors, a current status user interface]” [0031] and “The options for status can include providing a new status (e.g., "Confirmed" (order has been received and confirmed), "Sent" (Order has been mailed) [i.e. indicating current status information associated with the selected wearable article, the current status information including a current shipment status for the selected wearable article], "Dry Cleaning" (Order has been returned and the items are currently at the dry cleaning services of the provider), "Closed" (Orders that have been finished and there are no other items outstanding), "Cancelled" (Order was canceled))” [0036]).

Regarding claim 26, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21. Moss further discloses:
-wherein the wearable article data describes the one or more wearable articles for physical shipment to the user (Moss, see at least: “ Each category can include a corresponding product listing page that can provide a user interface (e.g., a website) containing a list available items in each category and a corresponding product detail page (e.g., another website) that can provide the customer with specific details about an item selected from the product detail page (e.g., color, size, price, availability, etc.) [i.e. wherein the wearable article data describes the one or more wearable articles]” [0029] and “The information can include at least one of the following, order number, first and last names of the customer, status, products cost value, shipment cost, applicable tax, total cost value of the order, date/time of the order, payment type, shipping information (including different shipping options: overnight, two-day, etc.) [i.e. for physical shipment to the user]” [0031]).

Regarding claim 32, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21. Moss further discloses:
-wherein the user interface includes at least one of an option to borrow the selected wearable article or an option to purchase the selected wearable article (Moss, see at least: “The customer 104 can request rental of a clothing item for a predetermined period of time (e.g., a day, a week, a month, a year, and/or any other period of time) [i.e. wherein the user interface includes at least one of an option to borrow the selected wearable article or an option to purchase the selected wearable article] and then return the item after expiration of that predetermined period of time. The customer 104 can also request a purchase of the rented item from the provider 102 after expiration of the predetermined period of time” [0020]).

Regarding claim 33, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21. Moss further discloses:
-reserving the selected wearable article for the predetermined period of time (Moss, see at least: “The customer 104 can request rental of a clothing item for a predetermined period of time (e.g., a day, a week, a month, a year, and/or any other period of time) and then return the item after expiration of that predetermined period of time [i.e. reserving the selected wearable article for the predetermined period of time]” [0020]).
Moss does not explicitly disclose as a result of reserving the selected wearable article for the predetermined period of time, updating and causing display of a current status user interface to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time.
Faris further teaches purchasing a product online (i.e. [0340]), including the known technique of, as a result of reserving the product for the predetermined period of time, updating and causing display of a current status user interface to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time (Faris, see at least: “In one embodiment, such as the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 48, when a user successfully wins a hero product, the app celebrates him with a big congratulations overlay and a BUY NOW button. He may have minutes (e.g. 10 minutes) [i.e. as a result of reserving the [product] for the predetermined period of time] to complete the purchase” [0217] and “In response to the hero product unlock [i.e. as a result of reserving the [product] for the predetermined period of time], there may be a countdown widget displayed to indicate to the user that he or she has a predefined period of time (e.g., 10 minutes) to hit the Buy button and checkout, creating a sense of urgency to reserve and buy the hero product. FIG. 16 is one example of a user interface configured in a check out mode [i.e. updating and causing display of a current status user interface to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time]. For instance, if the user does not checkout during the 10 minutes, he or she misses the chance to buy the hero product” [0340] and Figs. 15B-16 show that the interface with the product reveal and ‘buy now’ option is updated to a product detail with a ’timed session’ indication on the top of the interface, as well as, Fig. 26 displaying a countdown timer in a panel at the top of the product detail page [i.e. updating and causing display of a current status user interface to indicate a remaining amount of time for the predetermined period of time]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Moss with Faris for the reasons identified above with respect to claim 21.

Claims 34-37 contain limitations directed towards a computer system (i.e. abstract) for providing a user interface to a user for an electronic transactions platform, the computer system comprising:
a memory having processor-readable instructions stored therein (Moss, see at least: “The system 400 can include a processor 410, a memory 420, a storage device 430, and an input/output device 440” [0065]); and
one or more processors configured to access the memory and execute the processor-readable instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors configures the one or more processors to perform a plurality of functions (Moss, see at least: “The processor 410 can be further configured to process instructions stored in the memory 420 or on the storage device 430, including receiving or sending information through the input/output device 440. The memory 420 can store information within the system 400” [0065]).
The rest of the limitations recited in claims 34-37 are parallel in nature to those addressed for claims 21-24, respectively, and are therefore rejected for those same reasons set forth in claim claims 21-24, respectively.

Claims 38, 39, and 40 contain limitations directed towards a non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions for providing a user interface to a user for an electronic transactions platform, the instructions enabling one or more processors to perform operations (Moss, see at least: “Articles are also described that comprise a tangibly embodied machine-readable medium embodying instructions that, when performed, cause one or more machines (e.g., computers, etc.) to result in operations described herein” [0009]). The limitations recited in claims 38, 39, and 40 are parallel in nature to those addressed for claims 34, 37, and 36, respectively, and are therefore rejected for those same reasons set forth in claim claims 34, 37, and 36, respectively.

Claims 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moss, in view of Faris, in further view of Koulis et al. (US 2021/0118044 A1), hereinafter Koulis.
Regarding claim 27, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21.
Moss in view of Faris does not explicitly teach initiating an API call to an external system to retrieve one or more current valuations for each of the one or more wearable articles and determining one or more transaction values according to the one or more current valuations; and displaying, by the one or more processors, the one or more wearable articles and the one or more transaction values on the user interface for the electronic transactions platform.
Koulis, however, teaches a system for use in the rental of designer clothing (i.e. abstract), including initiating an API call to an external system to retrieve one or more current valuations for each of the one or more wearable articles and determining one or more transaction values according to the one or more current valuations (Koulis, see at least: “the designer clothing sharer to enter a description for an item of designer clothing. This description may be entered … by API [i.e. initiating an API call to an external system] or by any other automated or electronic means. The designer clothing sharing system subsequently assesses at least one desired data set related to the designer clothing, such as rental data [i.e. to retrieve one or more current valuations for each of the one or more wearable articles] or peer-to-peer sharing data or any other predefined data set. The designer clothing sharing system may be configured to display the assessed data on a display which may show at least one of; a potential future transactional rental estimate, a sharing economy estimate [i.e. and determining one or more transaction values according to the one or more current valuations]” [0108] and “the sharing economy value may determine whether an item of designer clothing should be sold or have the price decreased or increased before being sold. This sharing economy value may be based on the frequency by which the item of designer clothing is successfully rented in the past, or the frequency in which similar items of clothing are successfully rented, or being shared or being used on demand [i.e. and determining one or more transaction values according to the one or more current valuations]” [0101]); and
displaying, by the one or more processors, the one or more wearable articles and the one or more transaction values on the user interface for the electronic transactions platform (Koulis, see at least: “when a clothing purchase is made through the online clothing retailer [i.e. displaying, by the one or more processors, the one or more wearable articles], the aggregator 21, automatically and in real-time, is configured to calculate a suggested rental price for the item of clothing … The aggregator 21 then, automatically and in real-time, displays the suggested rental price [i.e. displaying, by the one or more processors, the one or more transaction values on the user interface for the electronic transactions platform] to the first borrower 110 and/or the second borrower 108” [0097]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the method, as taught by Moss in view of Faris, initiating an API call to an external system to retrieve one or more current valuations for each of the one or more wearable articles and determining one or more transaction values according to the one or more current valuations; and displaying, by the one or more processors, the one or more wearable articles and the one or more transaction values on the user interface for the electronic transactions platform, as taught by Koulis, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Moss in view of Faris, to include the teachings of Koulis, in order to maximize the potential sales of the retailer (Koulis, [0101]).

Regarding claim 28, the combination of Moss/Faris/Koulis teaches the method of claim 27.
Moss in view of Faris does not explicitly teach the external system includes a data analytics system for collecting data and analytics associated with the one or more entities.
Koulis further teaches a system for use in the rental of designer clothing (i.e. abstract), including the external system includes a data analytics system for collecting data and analytics associated with the one or more entities (Koulis, see at least: “the designer clothing sharer to enter a description for an item of designer clothing. This description may be entered … by API [i.e. the external system] or by any other automated or electronic means. The designer clothing sharing system subsequently assesses at least one desired data set related to the designer clothing, such as rental data or peer-to-peer sharing data or any other predefined data set. The designer clothing sharing system may be configured to display the assessed data on a display which may show at least one of; a potential future transactional rental estimate, a sharing economy estimate” [0108] and “the system may carry out at least one of the following: … calculate a sharing economy value or rental value, associate an affiliate network or affiliate a software for the referral or peer-to-peer renters and/or lenders into the peer-to-peer designer clothing sharing system from external sources, integrate data from another collaborative or sharing economy provider [i.e. the external system includes a data analytics system for collecting data and analytics associated with the one or more entities] and integrate data from a third party insurance provider” [0122]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Moss in view of Faris with Koulis for the reasons identified above with respect to claim 27.

Regarding claim 29, the combination of Moss/Faris/Koulis teaches the method of claim 27.
Moss in view of Faris does not explicitly teach modifying, by the one or more processors, the one or more transaction values based on a set of attributes including at least one of: user data, user geography, a time of day, a date, or a season.
Koulis further teaches a system for use in the rental of designer clothing (i.e. abstract), including modifying, by the one or more processors, the one or more transaction values based on a set of attributes including at least one of: user data, user geography, a time of day, a date, or a season (Koulis, see at least: "item of designer clothing listed by the lender may be available to auction or available for its price to surge according to fluctuating user demand [i.e. modifying, by the one or more processors, the one or more transaction values]" [0074] and "the number of events in a location is typically lower during the mid-week periods and therefore, the price to rent the item of designer clothing would normally be expected to fall during this time period due to lower customer demand [i.e. based on a set of attributes including at least one of: user data, user geography, a time of day, a date, or a season]" [0059]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Moss in view of Faris with Koulis for the reasons identified above with respect to claim 27.

Regarding claim 30, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21.
Moss in view of Faris does not explicitly teach obtaining, by the one or more processors, identification data of at least one user of the electronic transactions platform, the identification data including at least one of demographic data, previous purchase data, or previous borrow data of the at least one user; and updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface based on the obtained identification data.
Koulis, however, teaches a system for use in the rental of designer clothing (i.e. abstract), including obtaining, by the one or more processors, identification data of at least one user of the electronic transactions platform, the identification data including at least one of demographic data, previous purchase data, or previous borrow data of the at least one user (Koulis, see at least: “a social media profile or account profile of at least one of the renter and the lender may be associated with the system [i.e. obtaining, by the one or more processors, identification data of at least one user of the electronic transactions platform] of the present disclosure. More particularly, the system of the present invention may associate at least one data set from at least one of a sale history, a transaction history, a reputational history, review data, pending or previous transaction data or any other predetermined data set associated with at least one of a social media account, a user account or a user history [i.e. the identification data including at least one of demographic data, previous purchase data, or previous borrow data of the at least one user]” [0117]); and
updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface based on the obtained identification data (Koulis, see at least: “if the system is configured to allow at least one social media account to be associated with a peer-to-peer designer account…the system may also be adapted to allow a user to import or associate images or videos from a social media website or account for use with a designer clothing sale [i.e. updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface] or auction…the system may allow…designer clothing trends from social media [i.e. based on the obtained identification data]” [0118]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the method, as taught by Moss in view of Faris, obtaining, by the one or more processors, identification data of at least one user of the electronic transactions platform, the identification data including at least one of demographic data, previous purchase data, or previous borrow data of the at least one user; and updating, by the one or more processors, the user interface based on the obtained identification data, as taught by Koulis, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Moss in view of Faris, to include the teachings of Koulis, in order to maximize the potential sales of the retailer (Koulis, [0101]).

Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moss, in view of Faris, in further view of Hopkins et al. (US 10,776,723 B1), hereinafter Hopkins.
Regarding claim 31, Moss in view of Faris teaches the method of claim 21. Moss further discloses:
-the selected wearable article is purchased or borrowed during the predetermined period of time (Moss, see at least: “The customer 104 can request rental of a clothing item for a predetermined period of time (e.g., a day, a week, a month, a year, and/or any other period of time) and then return the item after expiration of that predetermined period of time [i.e. the selected wearable article is purchased or borrowed during the predetermined period of time]” [0020]).

Moss in view of Faris does not explicitly teach in response to determining that the selected wearable article is not purchased or borrowed during the predetermined period of time, releasing, by the one or more processors, the reserved selected wearable article for other users.
Hopkins, however, teaches an electronic marketplace that includes providing products for rent (i.e. Col. 8 Ln. 4-9), including the known technique of, in response to determining that the item is not purchased or borrowed during the predetermined period of time, releasing, by the one or more processors, the reserved item for other users (Hopkins, see at least: “a determination is made as to whether any tickets in the reserved set of tickets for the customer 106 remain unpurchased. For example, the customer 106 may have selected 2 out of 4 total tickets that were proactively reserved for the customer, leaving 2 remaining tickets that the customer 106 does not wish to purchase. If remaining tickets exist [i.e. in response to determining that the item is not purchased or borrowed] after the confirmation to purchase some of the tickets is received, the process 700 follows the “yes” route from 724 to 704, where the algorithm determines whether to reassign the unclaimed tickets or put them into the pool of pre-sale tickets [i.e. releasing, by the one or more processors, the reserved item for other users], depending on the amount of time remaining [i.e. is not purchased or borrowed during the predetermined period of time] until the start of the pre-sale window 128(A)” Col. 29 Ln. 52-63). This known technique is applicable to the method of Moss in view of Faris as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to an electronic marketplace that includes providing products for rent.
It would have been recognized that applying the known technique of, in response to determining that the item is not purchased or borrowed during the predetermined period of time, releasing, by the one or more processors, the reserved item for other users, as taught by Hopkins, to the teachings of Moss in view of Faris would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such references into similar methods. Further, adding the modification of, in response to determining that the item is not purchased or borrowed during the predetermined period of time, releasing, by the one or more processors, the reserved item for other users, as taught by Hopkins, into the method of Moss in view of Faris would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved method that would give customers a better opportunity to purchase products (Hopkins, Col. 4 Ln. 37-38).

Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-Vasudevan et al. (US 2010/0153142 A1) teaches reserving tickets for a short time before the tickets are purchased or released.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARIELLE E WEINER whose telephone number is (571)272-9007. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Maria-Teresa (Marissa) Thein can be reached at 571-272-6764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.

/ARIELLE E WEINER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689