Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. Against this jurisprudential backdrop, I turn to the claimed invention next. Independent claim 1 of the subject application is reproduced below:

1. A method of matching data in a search query to data in a database (108) for determining a subject consumer's credit risk, the method comprising:
arranging a search query search engine and a search query matching engine to be in communication with a processor (202) and an Internet accessible database, the database (108) comprising a plurality of unstructured, incomplete and/or inconsistently formatted data about a plurality of consumers from a free form data source(104), the data being stored in respective database fields in a plurality of database records; in response to receiving, via the processor(202), a search query communicated over the Internet to the search engine (106) by a remote application to search for and retrieve credit-related data corresponding to the subject consumer, retrieving via the processor an initial set of search results from the database corresponding to the subject consumer, the step of retrieving being accomplished by converting and standardizing the search query and the plurality of database records via exact and pattern substitutions into a normalized search https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2025 07:26:34 pm ) query and a plurality of normalized database records, based on a normalization rule, wherein the normalized search query comprises a normalized search field and each of the plurality of normalized database records comprises a normalized database field;

Working of the claimed invention:

11. The claimed invention, which is intended to determine a consumer's credit risk, provides for a method of matching data in a search query to that in a data base. The method is implemented using software executable by one or more servers or computers, such as a computing device with a processor and memory. An application transmits a message that contains the search query to the system and the search engine. An initial set of search results are retrieved from the database after normalization of raw data and search queries into a condensed normalized format and returned to the application by the matching engine.

14. The method of the claimed invention may be explained with greater granularity with the following description and the corresponding figures from the complete specification. It involves: receiving a search query, retrieving relevant records from the database; receiving retrieved search records by the matching engine from the search engine (302); screening the retrieved records by comparing the data in the search query to the data in the retrieved records (304); discarding irrelevant data; normalizing the search query and records for standardization by concatenating multiple name fields, removing text within brackets, checking for non-allowed characters, removing unwanted noise https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2025 07:26:34 pm ) words and single characters among others and assigning matching strength scores to the records based on comparison (see Fig 5)(306); determining whether the record qualifies for further consideration (308) using qualifying criteria (see Fig 6) based on strength of matching points; rejecting the record if it does not meet the qualifying criteria (310); keeping it if it qualifies (312); determining if there are more records to be considered (314); repeating the process from step 308 to determine if further records meet the qualifying criteria; proceeding to step 316 if there are no further records wherein it is considered whether there is only one remaining record; if there is only one record, it is returned to the application at step 320; if there are more than one record, similar records are merged at step 318 (see Fig 4) and returned to the application.

20. In view of the foregoing discussion, the claimed invention cannot be said to fall under the categories of 'computer programme per se' or algorithm under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act. Instead, it involves technical considerations, achieved by technical means, and implemented on a computer involving hardware such as processor and search engines. In the impugned order, it was recorded categorically that the claimed invention satisfies the requirements of Section 2(1)(j) and that the rejection is solely under Section 3(k). Upon reaching the conclusion that Section 3(k) is not an impediment, I conclude that the impugned order cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/11/2025 07:26:34 pm )