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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant's submission filed on 6/9/26 has been entered. Claims 7, 9, 11, 14, 18-50, 52-100 are cancelled. Claims 1-6, 8, 10, 12-13, 15-17, 51 and 101-113 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10, 12-13, 15-17, 51 and 101-113 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the parametric tables comprise structured parameter fields corresponding to electrical characteristics of the related products and are normalized into a common parameter domain for comparison across different manufacturers”
--"and wherein the receiving comprises receiving the reference electrical device data input via a graphical user interface that constrains the input into predefined structured fields, “
--' wherein the determining comprises computing a similarity measure based on differences between the normalized parameter values”.
There appears to be no support for this limitation in the Applicant original disclosure. For example, Applicant referred to paragraphs 0045-0049 as support for ““wherein the outputting comprises generating a graphical user interface including the ranked set of candidate related products and associated parameter comparison data for each displayed product”.
However, the language in those paragraphs do not support “a ranked set of candidate related products and associated parameter comparison data for each displayed product”. Appropriate Action is required.
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. STEP 1
Is the claim(s) directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claims 1-6, 8, 10, 12-13, 15-17, 51 and 101-113 are all directed to a statutory category (e.g., a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). The answer is YES.
STEP 2A. Prong 1
The claims disclose the abstract idea of receiving a search request for product and outputting a matching or related product.
Exemplary claim 1 recites the following abstract concepts that are found to include “abstract idea”:
--configuring a database with related product data for related products, wherein the database is implemented in a cross-reference system wherein the parametric tables comprise structured parameter fields corresponding to electrical characteristics of the related products and are normalized into a common parameter domain for comparison across different manufacturers
“receiving… input data for a reference electrical device that comprises a reference electrical device data input and a reference electrical component parameter input provided by a user
--searching the database utilizing device matching criteria based on the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device; -- wherein the searching comprises executing a parameter-based comparison algorithm that compares a plurality of normalized parameter values of the reference electrical device to corresponding normalized parameter values of candidate related products stored in the database;
--determining … utilizing the device matching criteria at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device, wherein the device matching criteria is based on a value of a related product electrical component parameter of the at least one related product being within a threshold amount of the reference electrical component parameter of the reference electrical device, and wherein the at least one related product comprises a semiconductor device and/or an electrical component that is functionally equivalent to the reference electrical device; and
Automatically choosing [..] the at least one related product to recommend based on the device matching criteria, the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device
--outputting… information to the user …. that includes information on the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device so as to enable a potential acquisition by the user of the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device; wherein the outputting comprises generating a graphical user interface including the ranked set of candidate related products and associated parameter comparison data for each displayed product.
wherein the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device based on the device matching criteria comprises at least one device that matching criteria to determine the at least one related product that matches, relates, correlates, and/or approximates the reference device. and
The remaining limitations are no more than computer elements (i.e., a at least one processor, a user device, an internet enabled device (see e.g. claims 17, 42) to be used as a tool to perform this abstract idea.
The recited limitations cover a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers subject matter viewed as a certain method of organizing human activity with the additional recitation of generic computer components. For example, but for the “implementing at least one processor” language, the “configuring”, “receiving”, “searching”, “determining”, and outputting steps in the context of this claim encompasses the user receiving a request, looking up the information from the request from a list of products, and determining a matching product.
The practice of “configuring”, “receiving”, “searching”, “determining”, and outputting data, is a commercial or legal interaction long prevalent in our system of commerce. The claims recite the idea of performing various conceptual steps generically resulting in the identification of similar products. As determined earlier, none of these steps recites specific technological implementation details, but instead get to this result by receiving, selecting and determining data. Thus, the claims are directed to a certain method of organizing human activity
STEP 2A, Prong 2
Are there additional elements or a combination of elements in the claim that apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception?
The claims recite two additional elements:
1) a processor is used to identify the products, and “Wherein the at least one processor is implemented in a cross-reference system and/or the user device.
2) Outputting information on a display of the user device.
3) Searching a database utilizing device matching criteria.
The processor and the user device in the steps are recited at a high level of generality, i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data (receiving and outputting data). These generic processor limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Furthermore, the database is recited at a high level of generality as well.
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.
STEP 2B
The next issue is whether the claims provide an inventive concept because the additional elements recited in the claims provide significantly more than the recited judicial exception. Taking the claim elements separately, the function performed by the processor is purely conventional. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using an internet enabled device, a processor to identify products, displaying information on a user device, or searching a database steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Considered as an ordered combination, the computer components of Applicants' claims add nothing that is not already present when the steps are considered separately. The claimed invention does not focus on an improvement in computers as tools, but rather certain independently abstract ideas that use computers as tools. {Elec. Power, 830 F.3d at 1354). (Step 2B: NO).
There is no indication that indication that the processor is anything other than a generic, off-the-shelf computer component, and the Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs. Court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
Independent claims 51 and 101 recite similar limitations as claim 1 and are therefore rejected under the same rationale.
The dependent claims do not include any new additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For the reasons described above, they are also ineligible.
For example, claim 13 recites capturing data from a manufacturer websites, modifying the data and updating a database with the data. The websites and the database are tools used to perform the abstract idea.
Claim 15 recites implementing artificial intelligence to determine the related product. The artificial intelligence feature is claimed at a high level of generality and does not alter the abstract nature of the claims.
Accordingly, a conclusion that the collecting step is well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer Option 2.
See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity.
i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. A VAuto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350,1355,112 USPQ2d 1093,1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hoteis.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, Vne claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result-a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink." (emphasis added));
iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, VersataDev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306,1334,115 USPQ2d 1681,1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363,115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
The claims are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 12, 13, 15-17, 51 and 101, 102, 105, 106, 108, 111, 112 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lissar et al. (US 20040088283 A1), in view of Arnold et al. (US 20080189260 A1).
Re-claim 1, Lissar et al. teach a method for related product identification comprising:
--configuring a database with related product data for related products, wherein the database is implemented in a cross-reference system and/or the database is implemented in a memory of a user device, and wherein the related product data is based on parametric tables of the related products: wherein the parametric tables comprise structured parameter fields corresponding to electrical characteristics of the related products and are normalized into a common parameter domain for comparison across different manufacturers
(see e.g. [0049] Advantageously, the data normalization 202 allows designing and dynamically maintaining a highly normalized data model (expert data model) to be populated and searched from two or more same-subject sources, thereby providing a multi-enterprise normalized database. More particularly, the data normalization 202 allows building a product cross reference system, for example, a dynamic competitor product cross reference system (a product class structure), by allowing parameterized (parametric) data searches across various types and/or different subject sources (i.e., different data sources, such as different manufacturers, different databases, etc., and various types of data sources, such as end-users, third party suppliers, testers, etc.) because initial data of the subject from any subject source is converted into the input forms describing the subject as a collection of domains (dynamic rule sets) at a higher level of abstraction than each subject source.)
[0105] The database 510 is programmed to scale to multiple servers and multiple sites with automatic update.
[0106] The user interface 530 (see FIG. 4) is the component that provides the user interface to the central web site services. This is the `front end` for all the other components. The central web site service provides simple point and click access to any feature, as well as an intuitive feel for each type of user. Accordingly, the user interface 530 provides an data entry interface for one type of user, a search interface for another type of user, a quality assurance interface for yet another type of user.)
--receiving with at least one processor input data for a reference electrical device that comprises a reference electrical device data input and a reference electrical component parameter input provided by a user with the a user device, wherein the reference electrical device comprises any type of semiconductor device and/or any type of electrical component, and wherein the reference electrical component parameter input comprises a reference electrical component parameter that characterizes the reference electrical device;
(see e.g. [0047] For the resistor, resistance is most important, in addition to type of resistor. However, for example, a design engineer as an end-user typically knows other capacitor and resistor characteristics (voltage tolerances, current tolerances, etc.) as well. Thus, a search under capacitors and type of capacitor includes capacitance as primary and the other domains as secondary. For resistors and specific types of resistors, the resistance is primary and other domains secondary. Therefore, for capacitors, search by resistance is secondary and for resistors, search by capacitance is secondary. For both capacitors and resistors, the current and potential difference domains are secondary.)
[0064] FIG. 5 illustrates table diagrams for electronic parts according to an embodiment of the invention. Using the electronic parts subject example, when entering electronic parts into a database to be used for an online parts locator search engine 505, parts records can be pre-entered from several companies in the database 510 or some records have already been entered. The parts being entered can have many fields (data elements) that describe each part.)
----and wherein the receiving comprises receiving the reference electrical device data input via a graphical user interface that constrains the input into predefined structured fields, and
(see e.g. [0051] For manual keyboard data entry, input from correct electronic-part type input forms would be required. )
[0071] In FIG. 6, advantageously, the pre-comparing process allows intelligent data input, minimizing data input and data input errors. ---Intelligent data entry (as well as intelligent search on the search side) is accomplished by reading data from the previously entered and validated similar fields and comparing the data with data input for the record being entered.)
--searching the database utilizing device matching criteria based on the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device;
(see e.g. [0064] As the user enters data in the part name and description fields for the table 550, the data entry program 500 searches the existing records for other parts that have same or similar data in their part name and description fields.)
wherein the searching comprises executing a parameter-based comparison algorithm that compares a plurality of normalized parameter values of the reference electrical device to corresponding normalized parameter values of candidate related products stored in the database;
(see e.g. [0055] In FIG. 2, further at 210, validation measures are applied during data entry and/or data search.
[0057] Therefore, validation rules based on data models for any given item category can be developed from the set of descriptors that describe the item category by comparing data of previously entered fields of the item category to data being entered and/or used as search terms and using results of the comparison to develop limits of acceptable ranges for the descriptors during data entry and/or data search. Typically, similar data (i.e., close to the same) can also be used to dynamically adjust the descriptor ranges, thereby providing the dynamic domain-range reduction 205.)
--determining with the at least one processor utilizing the device matching criteria at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device,
(see e.g. [0064] As the user enters data in the part name and description fields for the table 550, the data entry program 500 searches the existing records for other parts that have same or similar data in their part name and description fields. If the program 500 finds same or similar records, the program enters the found data into data entry screens for the current part data entry for the remaining as yet un-entered fields in the tables 550, 555 and/or 560.)
--and wherein the at least one related product comprises a semiconductor device and/or an electrical component that is functionally equivalent to the reference electrical device; and
(see e. g. [0046] For example, regarding electronic parts item category, a capacitor and a resister can share one defined field to describe how electricity flows through a capacitor and a resistor (i.e., capacitor and resistor can have overlapping domains), thereby providing another domain rule.
[0047] Intelligent searches are performed when using such overlapping domains. Using the capacitor and the resistor example, the capacitor domains typically include capacitance (farads), resistance (ohms), current (amps), potential difference (voltage), whereas the resistor includes all of these as well. For the capacitor, capacitance is most important electronic attribute, in addition to type of capacitor (prong vs. tape, barrel vs. upright, etc). For the resistor, resistance is most important, in addition to type of resistor. However, for example, a design engineer as an end-user typically knows other capacitor and resistor characteristics (voltage tolerances, current tolerances, etc.) as well. Thus, a search under capacitors and type of capacitor includes capacitance as primary and the other domains as secondary. For resistors and specific types of resistors, the resistance is primary and other domains secondary. Therefore, for capacitors, search by resistance is secondary and for resistors, search by capacitance is secondary. For both capacitors and resistors, the current and potential difference domains are secondary.)
--outputting information with the at least one processor to the user on a user device display of the user device that includes information on the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device so as to enable a potential acquisition by the user of the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device,
(see e.g. [0064] As the user enters data in the part name and description fields for the table 550, the data entry program 500 searches the existing records for other parts that have same or similar data in their part name and description fields. If the program 500 finds same or similar records, the program enters the found data into data entry screens for the current part data entry for the remaining as yet un-entered fields in the tables 550, 555 and/or 560.
[0097] The database service can provide complete multi-source supply management solutions for the electronics component industry, including product identification, procurement, lead time and availability for companies using the system. Each user, from a single engineer looking for a part to a company looking for improved vendor communications, can gain significant value in using the service.
--FIG. 14 is a display screen of search results by product name (e.g., a resistor) according to an embodiment of the present invention. Searches may be performed using any characteristics, features and/or functions of an item of a subject, such as in case of electronic parts a product manufacturer, a product description, and a manufacturer's part number. Searching using the product description field 552 based upon characteristics, features and/or functions of the item improves speed and accuracy of information search results based upon data from different data sources.
0095] An effective CRS provides information across products. The normalization 200 provides linked and indexed data structures that allow for a variety of parametric searches. For example, in case of electronic parts, in addition to the usual simple product characteristics (part type/current/power/resistance/color/materials, etc.) and manufacturer characteristics (name/location/contacts, etc.), a CRS of the invention allows searches by equivalency (for example, 10 ohm resistors that can all be used in a given shape or board configuration), prioritized equivalency (ordered by best option, where performance characteristics are varied or sources are constrained by preferred-source contracts), required association (one part needs a specific connector to function), or incompatibility (by performance or policy criteria).
--wherein the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device based on the device matching criteria comprises at least one device that relates, correlates, and/or approximates the reference electrical device.
(see e.g. [0063] In particular, the data entry process 500, while entering data into a field of a record of the database 510, performs a pre-comparing process by searching the database 510 for fields similar to or associated with the entered field.
[0011] For example, an expert data model system according to the present invention can provide information relating to any set of items (any subject/item category) with very large number of elements, such as (without limitation) electronic parts and components, prescription drugs, patient data, population data, user profile data, Internet addressing data, books, DVD's. This is done by intelligently designing an intelligent data model based upon characteristics, features, and/or functions of a subject for which a database system is being implemented, intelligently validating and entering existing and/or new data into the database, and intelligently and rapidly (substantially instantly) searching the database to provide any information relating to the subject.
[0014]. In particular, the present invention provides while entering search terms, to search the database for fields similar to or associated with entered search terms to provide data of the similar or associated fields, allowing automatic real-time intelligent information retrieval.)
Although anticipated, Lissar et al. do not explicitly teach the following limitations.
However, Arnold et al. explicitly teach receiving the reference electrical component parameter input via a parameter input portion comprising a plurality of selectable parameter fields corresponding to electrical characteristics;
(see e.g. [0119] The process begins when a specified part number is received (operation 1002). The process retrieves a part number description for the specified part number (operation 1004). In one example, part number description data is retrieved from one or more parts catalogs in the relational data base system. The process also retrieves a set of part number descriptions for other part numbers (operation 1006). These other part numbers are part numbers to be compared to the specified part number to determine if any of the other part numbers are duplicate or substitute parts for the specified part. These parts may be referred to as comparison part numbers.
[0120] The process parses the specified part number description for attributes (operation 1008). The process uses parameters to identify the attributes. Parameters are specified in special expressions in an intelligent learning agent in the relational database system. The process also parses the set of part number descriptions for the comparison attributes (operation 1010). The process compares the attributes identified in the specified part number description with the attributes identified in the set of part number descriptions for the comparison part numbers (operation 1012). The comparison of text description and special expressions for each part in a set of part number descriptions looks for similarities in all entries in all fields for a given part in a parts catalog. This comparison may be performed by an intelligent learning agent, such as intelligent learning agent 306 in FIG. 3.
[0108] In another example, a user may select attribute types for the selected attribute types. The user may also select attribute types to be discarded. The illustrative embodiments may also utilize any combination of attribute types, attribute counts and thresholds, and/or user selection of attributes.
--wherein the determining comprises computing a similarity measure based on differences between the normalized parameter values
(see e.g. [0113] The degree of similarity between entity 802 and entity 804 can be described by means of similarity score 806. Similarity score 806 is any arbitrary score value to indicate a degree of similarity between specified part and an interchangeable part. In this example, entity 804 is an interchangeable part that has similarity score 806 of 3.20.
-identifying at least one closest matching related product;
(see e.g. [0103] In this example, interchangeable part number 504 has a ranking of five stars 508. This ranking indicates that interchangeable part number 504 is a closest match to specified part number 502. Interchangeable part number 504 is also listed first in the list of results. This also indicates that interchangeable part number 504 is a closest match to specified part number 502.)
--Automatically choosing with the at least one processor the at least one related product to recommend based on the device matching criteria, the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference electrical device,
(see e.g. [0061] Intelligent part substitution software 304 presents the specified part numbers and all interchange part numbers identified for the specified parts in a list that is provided to the user. In one embodiment, the list includes a similarity score or ranking that identifies how similar a given part number is as to the identified part. The ranking is a relative value indicating how much that part looks like or is similar to the specified part. Intelligent learning agent 306 compares each and every item to each and every other item to assign ranking or similarity score to each item. The ranking can be used to identify duplications or specified parts and the best substitute parts for a specified part to decrease costs, coordinate, and leverage purchasing. In other words, an identical part to the specified part would have a highest similarity score. A part that is least likely to be acceptable as an alternate part would be given the lowest similarity score.
[0103] In this example, interchangeable part number 504 has a ranking of five stars 508. This ranking indicates that interchangeable part number 504 is a closest match to specified part number 502. Interchangeable part number 504 is also listed first in the list of results. This also indicates that interchangeable part number 504 is a closest match to specified part number 502.)
--wherein the device matching criteria is based on a value of a related product electrical component parameter of the at least one related product being within a threshold amount of the reference electrical component parameter of the reference electrical device,
(see e.g. [0122] The process makes a determination as to whether an attribute has a weight greater than a threshold value (operation 1016). If the threshold is less than or equal to the threshold, the process discards the attribute (operation 1018). If the weight is greater than the threshold, the process selects the attribute (operation 1020). A weight is discarded if the weight indicates that the attribute is not unique or useful as a discriminator.
[0124] Returning now to step 1022, if no un-weighted attributes remain, the process ranks the selected attributes in accordance with the weight assigned to each attribute (operation 1024). Next, the process sorts the part numbers corresponding to the set of part number descriptions based on the ranking of the attributes identified in each part number description (operation 1026). The process then presents the sorted list of potential interchangeable part numbers to a user (operation 1028) with the process terminating thereafter.)
--wherein the outputting comprises generating a graphical user interface including the ranked set of candidate related products and associated parameter comparison data for each displayed product
(See e.g. [0048] A set of interchangeable parts is identified using the ranking for each part in the set of parts.
[0050] Another advantageous method also provides a computer implemented method for identifying interchangeable parts. A set of attributes for each part in a set of parts is identified. A rank is assigned to each part in the set of parts based on a degree of correlation between the set of attributes for a part in the set of parts and a set of identified attributes to form a set of ranked parts. A set of interchangeable parts from the set of parts is identified using the set of ranked parts.
[0102] In this example, part numbers are listed in decreasing order form the most relevant or closest match to the least relevant or least likely match to specified part number 502. In addition, part numbers are listed with a ranking. In this example, part numbers are ranked with one to five stars, where five stars indicates a closest or best match to the specified part.)
Arnold et al. also teach:
wherein the searching comprises executing a parameter-based comparison algorithm that compares a plurality of normalized parameter values of the reference electrical device to corresponding normalized parameter values of candidate related products stored in the database;
[0120] The process parses the specified part number description for attributes (operation 1008). The process uses parameters to identify the attributes. Parameters are specified in special expressions in an intelligent learning agent in the relational database system. The process also parses the set of part number descriptions for the comparison attributes (operation 1010). The process compares the attributes identified in the specified part number description with the attributes identified in the set of part number descriptions for the comparison part numbers (operation 1012). The comparison of text description and special expressions for each part in a set of part number descriptions looks for similarities in all entries in all fields for a given part in a parts catalog. This comparison may be performed by an intelligent learning agent, such as intelligent learning agent 306 in FIG. 3.
[0073] Attributes are discriminators used to compare part number descriptions for parts with different part numbers. Attributes include part-specific words, symbols, values, abbreviations, and attribute patterns. Intelligent learning agent 306 then establishes associations between attributes within a single part number text description entry and text description entries associated with other part numbers. In other words, intelligent learning agent 306 identifies attributes in the other part number descriptions that correspond to attributes in the specified part number descriptions, even if the attributes are not identical or exactly the same.
[0074] Thus, intelligent learning agent 306 is able to derive relationships among the decomposed text entries to establish relationships between part numbers that are not obvious using queries normally used in relational databases to identify commonalities between part number descriptions that are not identical free text descriptions.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lissar et al., and replace the parts from Lissar et al. with the parts from Arnold et al., as taught by Arnold et al., in order to find at least a part sufficiently similar to the specified part such that the substitute or duplicate part may be used in place of the specified part. (see e.g. [0098]). Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious. (see KSR-Supreme Court decision).
Re-claim 2, Lissar et al. teach a method for related product identification according to claim 1 further comprising preparing data for rendering a reference input display with the processor for display to the user on the; receiving the reference electrical device data input from the user from the reference electrical device data input portion of the user device; and receiving the reference electrical component parameter input from the user from the parameter input portion of the user device..
(see e.g. (see e.g. [0047] [Thus, a search under capacitors and type of capacitor includes capacitance as primary and the other domains as secondary. For resistors and specific types of resistors, the resistance is primary and other domains secondary. Therefore, for capacitors, search by resistance is secondary and for resistors, search by capacitance is secondary. For both capacitors and resistors, the current and potential difference domains are secondary.
[0064] The parts being entered can have many fields (data elements) that describe each part. For example, voltage, current, heat production, x-dimension, y-dimension, z-dimension, pin configuration, material, color, resistance, capacitance, name, description, and manufacturer --As the user enters data in the part name and description fields for the table 550, the data entry program 500 searches the existing records for other parts that have same or similar data in their part name and description fields. If the program 500 finds same or similar records, the program enters the found data into data entry screens for the current part data entry for the remaining as yet un-entered fields in the tables 550, 555 and/or 560.)
[0084] FIG. 9 is a display screen to start the data entry for items, such as electronic parts, to be placed in a database. FIG. 10 is a display screen to start searching the database for similar items and pre-filling data elements for entry of the new item in FIG. 9. FIG. 11 is a display screen to add an attribute (i.e., a characteristic/function/features) to the new item (e.g., an actuator) being entered in FIG. 9. FIG. 12 is a display screen to select summary data to be concatenated for pre-constructing a full text "search index" of the database. FIG. 5 shows some examples of fields which can be combined. FIG. 13 is a display screen to complete the process of entering the new item in FIG. 9 into the database
[0095] An effective CRS provides information across products. The normalization 200 provides linked and indexed data structures that allow for a variety of parametric searches. For example, in case of electronic parts, in addition to the usual simple product characteristics (part type/current/power/resistance/color/materials, etc.) and manufacturer characteristics (name/location/contacts, etc.), a CRS of the invention allows searches by equivalency (for example, 10 ohm resistors that can all be used in a given shape or board configuration), prioritized equivalency (ordered by best option, where performance characteristics are varied or sources are constrained by preferred-source contracts), required association (one part needs a specific connector to function), or incompatibility (by performance or policy criteria). As a cross-product linkage example, a tabled system for pre-made assemblages of parts and components is developed for search or investigation.)
wherein the outputting information comprises displaying information on the at least one related product to the user on the user device display: wherein the displaying information on the at least one related product comprises displaying on the user device display at least one of the following: a stock-keeping unit (SKU) for the at least one related product, a buy online icon for the at least one related product, a datasheet icon for the at least one related product, and/or a parameter data listing for the at least one related product:
(see e.g. [0084] FIG. 14 is a display screen of search results by product name (e.g., a resistor) according to an embodiment of the present invention. Searches may be performed using any characteristics, features and/or functions of an item of a subject, such as in case of electronic parts a product manufacturer, a product description, and a manufacturer's part number. Searching using the product description field 552 based upon characteristics, features and/or functions of the item improves speed and accuracy of information search results based upon data from different data sources.
[0097] The database service can provide complete multi-source supply management solutions for the electronics component industry, including product identification, procurement, lead time and availability for companies using the system. Each user, from a single engineer looking for a part to a company looking for improved vendor communications, can gain significant value in using the service.
and wherein the database stores at least one of the following: a stock-keeping unit (SKU) for the at least one related product, a datasheet for the at least one related product, and/or a parameter data listing for the at least one related product.
(see e.g. [0044] For example, in case of the electronic parts/component, possible domains can include all the physical features involving how electricity flows through a specified electronic part (current, voltage, resistance, capacitance, etc.) as well as any manufacturer-specific characteristics (materials, plating, color, markings, size/shape dimensions, etc). This approach is unique in having organized characteristics, features and/or functions in a fashion that exhaustively might be needed for identifying and selecting a particular electronic part, while efficiently reducing the domains, or number of allowed levels, for each characteristic, feature and/or function describing an electronic part, so that "same" or "different" are meaningful to all possible end users of the electronic parts, such as engineers, testers, etc., that will use the data model (database system).
[0046] Because the data model 202 is designed based upon the higher level domains describing the characteristics, features and/or functions of the subject from many subject sources, the data model 202 can store data using repeated/shared fields (i.e., characteristic-feature-function-specific fields).
Re-claim 3, Lissar et al. teach --displaying information on the at least one related product and the second at least one related product to the user on the user device display;
wherein the displaying information on the at least one related product and the second at least one related product comprises displaying to the user on the user device display at least one of the following: a stock-keeping unit (SKU) for the at least one related product, a buy online icon for the at least one related product, a datasheet icon for the at least one related product, and/or a parameter data listing for the at least one related product. wherein the database stores at least one of the following: a stock-keeping unit (SKU) for the at least one related product, a datasheet for the at least one related product, and/or a parameter data listing for the at least one related product.
(see e.g. (see e.g. [0044], [0046]).
--[0084] FIG. 14 is a display screen of search results by product name (e.g., a resistor) according to an embodiment of the present invention. Searches may be performed using any characteristics, features and/or functions of an item of a subject, such as in case of electronic parts a product manufacturer, a product description, and a manufacturer's part number. Searching using the product description field 552 based upon characteristics, features and/or functions of the item improves speed and accuracy of information search results based upon data from different data sources.)
Lissar et al. do not explicitly teach the limitations as claimed.
However, Arnold et al. teach --determining with the at least one processor utilizing the device matching criteria a second at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input comprising a parameter greater than or less than the reference electrical component parameter input; and
wherein determining the second related product comprises calculating parameter deviation and identifying a nearest value above or below the reference parameter;
(see e.g. [0112] FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating a list of potential interchangeable parts results in accordance with an advantageous embodiment of the present invention. List of results 700 is a list of potential interchangeable parts provided in a ranked order descending from closest matching or most relevant part to least relevant part number.
[0121] Next, the process assigns a weight to each attribute identified in the specified part number description that is common to one or more part number descriptions in the set of part number descriptions (operation 1014). The weight is assigned based on the type of attribute, the number of part number descriptions that include the attribute, a user defined weight for an attribute, and/or any other factors for assigning a weight to an attribute.
[0122] The process makes a determination as to whether an attribute has a weight greater than a threshold value (operation 1016). If the threshold is less than or equal to the threshold, the process discards the attribute (operation 1018). If the weight is greater than the threshold, the process selects the attribute (operation 1020). A weight is discarded if the weight indicates that the attribute is not unique or useful as a discriminator.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lissar et al., and include the features taught by Arnold et al., so a user can replace specified part number 702 with interchangeable part number 704. (see e.g. [0112]).
Re-claim 6, Lissar et al., further in view of Arnold et al. teach the limitations as seen in claim 3 above. The third related products is an obvious variation of Lissar et al., further in view of Arnold et al., since multiple components are displayed as search results.
Re-claim 8, Lissar et al., further teach a method for related product identification according to claim 1 wherein the reference electrical device data input comprises at least one of the following: a manufacturer name, a part number, multiple manufacturer names, a device type, and/or multiple part numbers. (see e.g. paragraph [0084] Searches may be performed using any characteristics, features and/or functions of an item of a subject, such as in case of electronic parts a product manufacturer, a product description, and a manufacturer's part number.
[0097] According to an embodiment of the invention, a database of electronic components, which are produced by many manufacturers, can be provided. Part number, technical specification, and photographs would list these parts where appropriate.).
Re-claim 12, Lissar et al. further teaches a method for related product identification according to claim 1 further comprising receiving the reference electrical component parameter input from the user from a parameter input portion of the user device, wherein the reference electrical component parameter input comprises at least one of the following:
a qualification, a drain-source on-state resistance, a drain-source voltage, a maximum drain current, a polarity, a minimum operating temperature, a maximum operating temperature, a pulsed drain current, a DC body diode forward current, a pulsed body diode current, a gate-source voltage, a maximum transient voltage, a recommended turn-off gate voltage, a short-circuit withstand time, a power dissipation, a virtual junction temperature, a storage temperature, a soldering temperature, a body diode thermal resistance, a junction - case, thermal resistance, a body diode forward voltage, a gate-source threshold voltage, a zero gate voltage drain current, a gate-source leakage current, a transconductance, an internal gate resistance, an input capacitance, an output capacitance, a reverse capacitance, a stored energy, a total gate charge, a gate to source charge, a gate to drain charge, a turn-on delay time, a rise time, a turn- off delay time, a fall time, a turn-on energy, a turn-off energy, a total switching energy, a diode reverse recovery charge, a diode peak reverse recovery current, a device resistance, a device capacitance, device resonant points, an inductance, transfer data, a transfer function, data representative of an independent scalar input versus a dependent scalar output, parametric data, a device transfer curve, time domain waveforms, static losses, dynamic losses, and/or a drain-source current.
(see e.g. [0061] The users at client computers 110 can, online, for example, via the Internet, retrieve and/or interact with information from a database system 215 designed and implemented according to the normalization 200 for a category of items.
[0064] FIG. 5 illustrates table diagrams for electronic parts according to an embodiment of the invention. Using the electronic parts subject example, when entering electronic parts into a database to be used for an online parts locator search engine 505, parts records can be pre-entered from several companies in the database 510 or some records have already been entered. The parts being entered can have many fields (data elements) that describe each part. For example, voltage, current, heat production, x-dimension, y-dimension, z-dimension, pin configuration, material, color, resistance, capacitance, name, description, and manufacturer.)
Re-claim 13, Lissar et al. teach the method for related product identification according to claim 1 further comprising: capturing parametric tables of the related products directly from manufacturer websites; modifying data associated with the parametric tables of the related products to generate the related product data to utilize the device matching criteria and ensure accurate comparisons and matching; and updating the database with the related product data,
(see e.g. [0100] An intelligent web crawler (a database transformation application 515) reads each manufacturer or distributor web site to download the data from their web site. The web crawler is programmed with the Internet address for each manufacturer or distributors web site. It is then programmed with a schedule or interval to download the information available on that web site. The web crawler `pulls` all of the data available from the manufacturer or distributors web site and places it into directories within a central web site (cross reference system), such as a web site developed and managed by ElecDECom assignee of the present invention. This data is then `indexed` using the invention's content index and `parsed` into the database 510 using a web site parser.
[0102] As items are added to either the central web site or the database 510 the content index automatically updates its structures to include the new data. The normalization 200 allows incorporation of varying searching for data access, for example, via part name and component, via a product name, generic name and common name, and via a full text search of all of the words and phrases in the database.
[0105] All database components are 100% scaleable with no practical size limitations. The database 510 is programmed to scale to multiple servers and multiple sites with automatic update. Data entry can be from all sources and can be conducted both on-line and on-network).
-- wherein the reference electrical device data input comprises at least one of the following: keyed in data, data selection by drop-down boxes, data selection by selection from a list, data selection by a drop-down list, data selection by radio buttons, voice recognition input data, image input data, and/or machine-readable code input data.
(see e.g. [0051] For manual keyboard data entry, input from correct electronic-part type input forms would be required. For optical character recognition input (OCR), there is an initial stage of checking quality and nature of data conversion from the digital image prior to evaluation as machine-readable data.
[0029] FIG. 9 is a display screen to start the data entry for items to be placed in a database according to an embodiment of the present invention.
[0071] Intelligent data entry (as well as intelligent search on the search side) is accomplished by reading data from the previously entered and validated similar fields and comparing the data with data input for the record being entered.
[0076] In FIG. 4, the parser 515, which is in communication with the data entry application 500, can speed data entry by providing an alternative automatic data entry from multiple subject sources in addition to the manual data entry of the data entry application 500. The parser 515 data entry approach uses the data model for (thought to) the data entry application 500 as follows. Advantageously, by using the data entry application 500, data read from the pages can be pre-compared according to the pre-comparing process of the data entry application 500, thereby allowing dynamic normalization 200 via dynamic data normalization 202 at operation 700 when page models are generated, dynamic domain-range reduction 205 when at operation 710 the page model is verified, and dynamic validation measures 210 when at operation 710 the page model is verified.)
Re-claims 15, 16, Lissar et al. teach the method for related product identification according to claim 1 further comprising: implementing artificial intelligence to determine the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input of the reference device,
(see e.g. [0011] The present invention provides an expert data model system to design a data model (modeling a database structure) for a subject with very large number of data elements (fields/domains) that describe the subject, to intelligently validate existing data (data related to the subject), to intelligently enter the existing data into the database, to intelligently search the database and provide any information based on the entered data, and to substantially increase data integrity, including database search speed, efficiency, and effectiveness. For example, an expert data model system according to the present invention can provide information relating to any set of items (any subject/item category) with very large number of elements, such as (without limitation) electronic parts and components,
[0044 0045] [0047] Intelligent searches are performed when using such overlapping domains. Using the capacitor and the resistor example, the capacitor domains typically include capacitance (farads), resistance (ohms), current (amps), potential difference (voltage), whereas the resistor includes all of these as well. For the capacitor, capacitance is most important electronic attribute, in addition to type of capacitor (prong vs. tape, barrel vs. upright, etc). For the resistor, resistance is most important, in addition to type of resistor.
[0072] In FIG. 4, the data entry process 500 can further comprise an artificially intelligent data transformation application/tool 515 to read a given data structure and intelligently reformat the data into a new data structure. In particular, for example, the transformation tool 515 can read data from pre-existing databases 520, which store, according to traditional data models, data of subjects to be modeled from any subject sources in a new database 510 of the invention. Advantageously, the transformation tool 515 can intelligently automatically distribute data read from the pre-existing database 520 into fields of the database 510. --Thus, a search under capacitors and type of capacitor includes capacitance as primary and the other domains as secondary. For resistors and specific types of resistors, the resistance is primary and other domains secondary.)
wherein the outputting information on the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter further comprises displaying at least one of the following: a stock-keeping unit (SKU) for the at least one related product, a buy online icon for the at least one related product, a datasheet icon for the at least one related product, and/or a parameter data listing for the at least one related product. (see e.g.
and wherein the database stores at least one of the following: a stock-keeping unit (SKU) for the at least one related product, a datasheet for the at least one related product, and/or a parameter data listing for the at least one related product.
(see e.g. [0044] For example, in case of the electronic parts/component, possible domains can include all the physical features involving how electricity flows through a specified electronic part (current, voltage, resistance, capacitance, etc.) as well as any manufacturer-specific characteristics (materials, plating, color, markings, size/shape dimensions, etc). This approach is unique in having organized characteristics, features and/or functions in a fashion that exhaustively might be needed for identifying and selecting a particular electronic part, while efficiently reducing the domains, or number of allowed levels, for each characteristic, feature and/or function describing an electronic part, so that "same" or "different" are meaningful to all possible end users of the electronic parts, such as engineers, testers, etc., that will use the data model (database system).
[0046] Because the data model 202 is designed based upon the higher level domains describing the characteristics, features and/or functions of the subject from many subject sources, the data model 202 can store data using repeated/shared fields (i.e., characteristic-feature-function-speci- fic fields),
---the method for related product identification according to claim 2 , wherein: the at least one processor comprises a processor implemented by a cross- reference system that comprises the database; and the processor implemented by the cross-reference system connects to the device over a network. (see e.g. (see e.g. [0049] More particularly, the data normalization 202 allows building a product cross reference system, for example, a dynamic competitor product cross reference system (a product class structure), by allowing parameterized (parametric) data searches across various types and/or different subject sources (i.e., different data sources, such as different manufacturers, different databases, etc., and various types of data sources, such as end-users, third party suppliers, testers, etc.) because initial data of the subject from any subject source is converted into the input forms describing the subject as a collection of domains (dynamic rule sets) at a higher level of abstraction than each subject source.)
Re-claim 17, Lissar et al. teach the method for related product identification according to claim 2, wherein the device comprises an internet enabled device that comprises a processor implemented as the at least one processor.
(see e.g. [0039] In FIG. 1, the example embodiment is a networked client-server system 100 in which client system(s) 110 communicate with web server(s) 115a-n and database servers 120a-n via network(s) 105 using conventional Internet communication protocols and Internet document management techniques for data communication and user interface, such as Hyper Text Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS), Hyper Text Markup Language (HTML), and Extensible Markup Language (XML).
Claim 51 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Furthermore, Arnold et al. teach --automatically choose the at least one related product to recommend further based on weighted prioritization of a plurality of parameters to generate a ranked set of candidate related products (see e.g. (see e.g. [0061] Intelligent part substitution software 304 presents the specified part numbers and all interchange part numbers identified for the specified parts in a list that is provided to the user. In one embodiment, the list includes a similarity score or ranking that identifies how similar a given part number is as to the identified part. The ranking is a relative value indicating how much that part looks like or is similar to the specified part. Intelligent learning agent 306 compares each and every item to each and every other item to assign ranking or similarity score to each item. The ranking can be used to identify duplications or specified parts and the best substitute parts for a specified part to decrease costs, coordinate, and leverage purchasing.
[0075] Intelligent learning agent 306 rates the relationships between the text descriptions for a specified part and text descriptions for other part numbers in accordance with how similar and/or dissimilar the other parts are to the specified part. In other words, intelligent learning agent 306 parses through the data in a text description for a part and assigns a similarity score or relative ranking to the part.)
Claim 101 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Furthermore, Arnold et al. teach –
wherein the determining comprises computing similarity scores and identifying closest and next-closest related products based on parameter differences;
(see e.g. [0102] In this example, part numbers are listed in decreasing order form the most relevant or closest match to the least relevant or least likely match to specified part number 502. In addition, part numbers are listed with a ranking. In this example, part numbers are ranked with one to five stars, where five stars indicates a closest or best match to the specified part.
[0103] In this example, interchangeable part number 504 has a ranking of five stars 508. This ranking indicates that interchangeable part number 504 is a closest match to specified part number 502. Interchangeable part number 504 is also listed first in the list of results. This also indicates that interchangeable part number 504 is a closest match to specified part number 502.)
wherein the choosing comprises generating a ranked list based on weighted parameter prioritization,
(see e.g. [0105] Turning now to FIG. 6, a diagram illustrating a weighted list of selected attributes is depicted in accordance with an advantageous embodiment of the present invention. Attribute list 600 is a list of selected attributes listed in order of weight. In other words, a parts management database identifies multiple attributes from a specified part number description.
[0129] The process then assigns a weight to each attribute in the set of attributes based on whether each attribute is correlated to an attribute of the specified part number. The process ranks the different part numbers based on the weight assigned to each attribute associated with each different part number. The process also identifies a set of interchangeable parts based on the ranking of the different part numbers, wherein a different part with a highest ranking is a closest match to the specified part number.)
Claim 102 recites similar limitations as claim 3 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Furthermore, Arnold et al. teach –
wherein determining the second at least one related product further comprises: calculating a parameter deviation value between the reference electrical component parameter input and parameter values of candidate related products; and identifying the second at least one related product based on the parameter deviation value being closest to the reference electrical component parameter input. (see e.g. [0113] , [0103] ]
Claim 105 recites similar limitations as claim 6 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 106 recites similar limitations as claim 8 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 108 recites similar limitations as claim 3 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 111 recites similar limitations as claim 6 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 112 recites similar limitations as claim 8 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claims 4-5, 10, 103, 104, 107, 109, 110, 113 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lissar et al. (US 20040088283 A1), in view of Arnold et al. (US 20080189260 A1), in further view of Xu et al. (CN 109255664 A).
Re-claim 4, Lissar et al. do not explicitly teach the limitations as claimed.
Arnold et al. teach: --wherein the selection priority and/or weighting priority is applied to compute a weighted parameter comparison score used to rank candidate products;
(see e.g. [0061] Intelligent part substitution software 304 presents the specified part numbers and all interchange part numbers identified for the specified parts in a list that is provided to the user. In one embodiment, the list includes a similarity score or ranking that identifies how similar a given part number is as to the identified part. The ranking is a relative value indicating how much that part looks like or is similar to the specified part. Intelligent learning agent 306 compares each and every item to each and every other item to assign ranking or similarity score to each item. The ranking can be used to identify duplications or specified parts and the best substitute parts for a specified part to decrease costs, coordinate, and leverage purchasing.
[0075] Intelligent learning agent 306 rates the relationships between the text descriptions for a specified part and text descriptions for other part numbers in accordance with how similar and/or dissimilar the other parts are to the specified part. In other words, intelligent learning agent 306 parses through the data in a text description for a part and assigns a similarity score or relative ranking to the part.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lissar et al., in view of Bromley et al., and include the features taught by Arnold et al., in order to identify duplications or specified parts and the best substitute parts for a specified part to decrease costs, coordinate, and leverage purchasing (see e.g. [0061]).
Lissar et al., in view of Arnold et al., do not explicitly teach the limitations as claimed.
However Xu et al. teach the method for related product identification according to claim 3 ---wherein the reference electrical component parameter input comprises a plurality of parameter inputs: wherein the plurality of parameter inputs are configured to receive a selection priority and/or a weighting priority of each of the plurality of parameter inputs: wherein the method further comprises:
receiving with the at least one processor the plurality of parameter inputs from the user with the user device:
receiving with the at least one processor a selection priority and/or a weighting priority from the user with the user device: and searching and determining with the at least one processor utilizing the device matching criteria at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input, the plurality of parameter inputs, and the selection priority and/or the weighting priority:
– (see e.g. pages 3, 4-- Preferably, the requirement of product is provided with multiple, requirement setting weight for each product, product requirement high priority selection and the weight closest to the current product type data and the corresponding evaluation.
Because the existing refrigeration device searching the closest product requirement thereof provided with multiple is selected, Jiu-jing is most close to the building area or selected temperature, as the final result most close to the humidity environment, may demand setting weight for each product, product requirement high priority selection and the weight closest to the current product type data and the corresponding evaluation.
wherein the second at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input comprising a parameter greater than or less than the reference electrical component parameter input; and
wherein the second at least one related product comprises a next closest match to the reference device data input and the electrical component parameter input. (see e.g. page 3, 6 -receiving the product demand to be selection input by the user; finding the closest to the requirements of the product to be selection of existing product type data and the corresponding evaluation; when the evaluation is matched, then automatically select the existing product requirements of the product to be selection of model data. ----if searching the closest existing refrigeration equipment corresponding to the evaluation type data of the existing refrigeration device match, then automatically selecting product demand to be selection of the closest. ---existing refrigeration device closest to if searching out the corresponding evaluation is not matched, then further judging whether the existing refrigeration device type of the closest data relative to the actual use condition is large or small, is adjusted based on the type data of the existing product according to the judging result, and automatically selecting the type of data adjusted to be selection of product demand. such as refrigeration demand of the user is 16, the existing refrigeration equipment lowest temperature only can reach 17 degree, the type data is small relative to its use condition, need more refrigeration equipment, the proper type of product type selection to adjust. ---Because the existing refrigeration device searching the closest product requirement thereof provided with multiple is selected, Jiu-jing is most close to the building area or selected temperature, as the final result most close to the humidity environment, may demand setting weight for each product, product requirement high priority selection and the weight closest to the current product type data and the corresponding evaluation.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lissar et al., in view of Arnold et al., and include the features taught by Xu et al., in order to provide a more comprehensive range of product selection, so as to provide more accurate selection scheme, and also reduce the cost to the user (see e.g. page 4).
Re-claim 5, Lissar et al. teach wherein the outputting information on the second at least one related product comprises displaying at least one of the following: a stock-keeping unit (SKU) for the at least one related product, a buy online icon for the at least one related product, a datasheet icon for the at least one related product, and/or a parameter data listing for the at least one related product. (see e.g. [0044], [0046]).
Lissar et al., in view of Arnold et al. do not teach the following limitations.
However, Xu et al. teach -the method for related product identification according to claim 1--wherein the outputting information on the at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input further comprises displaying information to the user on the user device on a second at least one related product that has a next closest match to the reference electrical device data input and the reference electrical component parameter input (see e.g. page 3, 6 -receiving the product demand to be selection input by the user; finding the closest to the requirements of the product to be selection of existing product type data and the corresponding evaluation; when the evaluation is matched, then automatically select the existing product requirements of the product to be selection of model data. ----if searching the closest existing refrigeration equipment corresponding to the evaluation type data of the existing refrigeration device match, then automatically selecting product demand to be selection of the closest. ---existing refrigeration device closest to if searching out the corresponding evaluation is not matched, then further judging whether the existing refrigeration device type of the closest data relative to the actual use condition is large or small, is adjusted based on the type data of the existing product according to the judging result, and automatically selecting the type of data adjusted to be selection of product demand. such as refrigeration demand of the user is 16, the existing refrigeration equipment lowest temperature only can reach 17 degree, the type data is small relative to its use condition, need more refrigeration equipment, the proper type of product type selection to adjust. ---Because the existing refrigeration device searching the closest product requirement thereof provided with multiple is selected, Jiu-jing is most close to the building area or selected temperature, as the final result most close to the humidity environment, may demand setting weight for each product, product requirement high priority selection and the weight closest to the current product type data and the corresponding evaluation.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lissar et al., in view of Arnold et al., and include the features taught by Xu et al., in order to provide a more comprehensive range of product selection, so as to provide more accurate selection scheme, and also reduce the cost to the user (see e.g. page 4).
Re-claim 10, Lissar et al., in view of Arnold et al., do not explicitly teach the limitations as claimed.
However Xu et a. teach the method for related product identification according to claim 1 wherein the reference electrical component parameter input comprises a plurality of parameter inputs; wherein the plurality of parameter inputs are configured to receive a selection priority and/or a weighting priority of each of the plurality of parameter
and wherein the method further comprises: receiving with the at least one processor the plurality of parameter inputs from the user with the user device: receiving with the at least one processor a selection priority and/or a weighting priority from the user with the user device: and searching and determining with the at least one processor utilizing the device matching criteria at least one related product that matches the reference electrical device data input, the plurality of parameter inputs, and the selection priority and/or the weighting priority.
– (see e.g. pages 3, 4-- Preferably, the requirement of product is provided with multiple, requirement setting weight for each product, product requirement high priority selection and the weight closest to the current product type data and the corresponding evaluation.
Because the existing refrigeration device searching the closest product requirement thereof provided with multiple is selected, Jiu-jing is most close to the building area or selected temperature, as the final result most close to the humidity environment, may demand setting weight for each product, product requirement high priority selection and the weight closest to the current product type data and the corresponding evaluation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Lissar et al., in view of Arnold et al., and include the features taught by Xu et al., in order to provide a more comprehensive range of product selection, so as to provide more accurate selection scheme, and also reduce the cost to the user (see e.g. page 4).
Claim 103 recites similar limitations as claim 4 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 104 recites similar limitations as claim 5 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Furthermore, Arnold et al. teach –-wherein the system is further configured to: generate a ranking of related products based on similarity of parameter values to the reference electrical component parameter input; and display the second at least one related product as a next highest- ranked product relative to the at least one related product. (see e.g. [0105] [0129])
Claim 107 recites similar limitations as claim 10 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 109 recites similar limitations as claim 10 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 110 recites similar limitations as claim 5 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Claim 113 recites similar limitations as claim 10 and is therefore rejected under the same arts and rationale.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Non Final Action dated 3/10/26 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection.
Regarding the 101 rejection, Applicant arguments have been considered, but are not persuasive. For example, Applicant argued: Independent claims 1, 51, and 101, and their dependent claims, have been amended to introduce specific technical mechanisms including:
- Structured parametric data models (normalized parameter domains),
- Constrained graphical user interface (GUI) input tied to structured database fields,
- Parameter-based comparison algorithms, including similarity scoring and weighted prioritization, and
- Ranked and comparative output generation based on computed parameter relationships.
These amendments integrate the alleged abstract idea into a specific technological implementation for processing heterogeneous electronic component data, as described throughout the Specification.
The Examiner disagrees. For example:
-Generating a graphical user interface as claimed in claim 1 is considered generic computer implementation.
-Capturing parametric tables directly from manufacturer websites is considered extra-solution activity that is well-understood, routine, and conventional (receipt of data over a network).
-Inputting data via a GUI with predefined structured fields also is considered generic computer implementation (e.g. any website with different fields).
Furthermore, the computer components (processer database, GUI etc) are used as tools to process searching. Although Applicant claims an algorithm, it is recited at a high level of generality and does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Considered as an ordered combination, the computer components of Applicants' claims add nothing that is not already present when the steps are considered separately. The claimed invention does not focus on an improvement in computers as tools, but rather certain independently abstract ideas that use computers as tools. {Elec. Power, 830 F.3d at 1354). (Step 2B: NO).
With respect to the 103 rejection, the arguments regarding Bromley are moot in view of the new rejection.
Applicant other arguments regarding the newly added limitations are taught by the combination of LISSAR and Arnold. Please see the details in the action above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUNA CHAMPAGNE whose telephone number is (571)272-7177. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached at 571 272-6790. 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.
/LUNA CHAMPAGNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627 August 10, 2026
