DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-12 are currently presented for examination.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Following Applicants amendments to the Claims, the objectiond of the Claims is Withdrawn.
Following Applicants arguments and amendments, and in light of the 2019 Patent Eligibility guidance, the 101 rejection of the Claims is Maintained.
Applicant’s Argument: The additional elements that are done in the memory, recite steps of storing and retrieving from the memory, and performing the dynamic adjusting - step in and out of the memory, render the claim impossible to be done in the human mind.
Examiner’s Response: The Examiner disagrees and points to MPEP 2106.04 and 2106.05(f)(2). As stated in MPEP 2106.04, Nor do the courts distinguish between claims that recite mental processes performed by humans and claims that recite mental processes performed on a computer. This shows that a mental process performed on a computer is still a mental process. Additionally, in MPEP 2106.05(f)(2), Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. Here, the abstract idea is just received from memory, a mental process is performed as outlined below, and then stored again. This is the exact case outlined in this MPEP section. As the overall process is to create a daily construction report, as shown in figure 12, the claimed invention as a whole is a mental process.
Applicant’s Argument: The accuracy of the assembly section is improved due to the storing, receiving and transmitting of daily information.
Examiner’s Response: The Examiner disagrees as this falls within the use of a computer as a tool under MPEP 2106.05(f), as shown above, and cannot provide the improvement.
Therefore, the 101 rejection of the claims is Maintained.
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.
Regarding claims 1-12, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea) without anything significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-6 and 11 are directed to a device, which is a machine, which is a statutory category of invention. Claims 7-10 and 12 are directed to a method, which is a process, which is a statutory category of invention. Therefore, claims 1-12 are directed to patent eligible categories of invention.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claims 1 and 7 recite the abstract idea of constructing a pipe construction management document constituting Mental Processes based on concepts performed in the human mind, or with the aid of pencil and paper. The limitation of “… generates … daily construction report data for the assembling section based on the retrieved construction management information” covers mental processes including evaluating a set of data and making a judgement about how to report the data. But for the inclusion of the application software and in a memory, there is nothing that precludes operation in the human mind. This follows for each recitation. The limitation of " in response to receiving of the input data corresponding to the selection of the pipe number for the new assembling section, assign a unique pipe number to a pipe associated with the pipe number and assign a unique joint number to the pipe and a connecting pipe of the new assembling section; in response to receiving the input data corresponding to the type and the laying position of each of the laying pipes generate for the new assembling section the pipe connection information from which connection relationship between the laying pipes is identifiable based on the unique pipe number and the unique joint number and the pipe laying information from which the type and the laying position of each of the laying pipes are identifiable based on pipe attribute information;” covers mental processes including evaluating a set of pipes that need to be constructed and making a judgement about what information to assign to them. Additionally, the limitation of “in response to receiving of the input data corresponding to the request for the assembly check, receive confirmation input data corresponding to confirmation of one or more items during an assembling operation for the new assembling section;” covers mental processes including evaluating an assembly. Additionally, the limitation of “generate, …, the assembled condition management information based on i) stored confirmation input data corresponding to the confirmation of the items during the assembling operation of the new assembling section, and ii) the comparison between received sensor-based protrusion distance measurements data at the new assembling section and the stored adjusted allowable range of the deflection angle” covers mental processes including evaluating assembly information and making a judgment about further assembled management information. Other than reciting “a server”, “a database”, “a portable information terminal”, “a processor” (first and second), “an application software”, there is nothing that precludes operation of the claim limitations in the mind. Thus, the claims recite the abstract idea of a mental process performed in the human mind, or with the aid of pencil and paper.
Dependent claims 2-6 and 8-12 further narrow the abstract ideas, identified in the independent claims.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In Claims 1 and 7, the additional element of “a server”, “a database”, “a portable information terminal”, “a processor” (first and second), “an application software”, similarly recited in the dependent claims, merely uses a computer device as a tool to perform the abstract idea. (MPEP 2106.05(f)) The limitations of “a database configured to store the construction management information including pipe connection information, pipe laying information, and assembled condition management information, of a plurality of assembling sections collected at the pipeline construction site, wherein the plurality of assembling sections includes a cumulative value of deflection angles; and a first processor configured to execute a first application software to: receive data of new construction management information associated with an assembling section: retrieve the stored construction management information associated with the plurality of assembling sections from the database”, “store the generated daily construction report data in the database: and”, “transmit the stored daily construction report to a portable information terminal; the portable information terminal configured to be in communication with the server, the portable information terminal further comprising: a second processor configured to execute an application software to: receive and store in a memory input data corresponding, to a selection of a pipe number for a new assembling section;”, “store in the memory the assigned unique pipe number of the pipe and the unique joint member of the pipe and the connecting pipe of the new assembling section; receive and store in the memory input data corresponding to a type and a laying position of each pipe associated with the stored unique pipe number and the stored unique joint number;”, “store in the memory the generated pipe connection information and the generated pipe laving information; retrieve from the database the cumulative value of deflection angles;”, “dynamically adjust in the memory an allowable range of a deflection angle for pipes that have not yet been input including the pipes of the new assembling section, based upon the retrieved cumulative value of deflection angles stored in the database;”, “store in the memory the adjusted allowable range of the deflection angle for the pipes that have not yet been input including the pipes of the new assembling section: receive and store in the memory input data corresponding to a request for an assembly check;”, “store the confirmation input data in the memory. wherein the stored confirmation input data is associated with the new assembling section: receive and sensor-based protrusion distance measurements data at the new assembling section and compare the measurements data with the stored adjusted allowable range of the deflection angle:” “store in the memory the generated assembled condition management information and transmit to the server the generated pipe connection information, pipe laying information, and assembled condition management information as the data of the new construction management information associated with the assembling section; in response to the transmitting of the data of the new construction management information, receive data corresponding to the stored daily construction report data in the server; and the data corresponding to the stored daily construction report data is stored in the memory and”, similarly recited in claims 1 and 7, “wherein the second processor is configured to execute the second application software to” similarly recited in the dependent claims, as well as the receiving steps of claims2-4 and 8-10, as well as each receive, store and transmit limitation in each of the dependent claims, are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea using a computer in its ordinary capacity, or merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the identified abstract idea. See MPEP (2106.05(f)) Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a mental process) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2)) The additional limitation of “display the stored daily construction report data” similarly recited in claims 1 and 7, as well as “display a list of a plurality of available options for the pipe attribute information;” and “display the identified pipe attribute information” in claim 2, as well as “display an evaluation result” in claims 3-4 and 9-10,as well as “displaying a list of a plurality of available options for the pipe attribute information;”, “displaying the pipe attribute information” in claim 8, as well as “display the pipeline construction drawing generated by the pipeline construction drawing generation unit” in claim 11, and “display process of displaying the pipeline construction drawing generated by the pipeline construction drawing generation process” in claim 12, can be viewed as is insignificant extra-solution activity, specifically pertaining to outputting (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and is not sufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. This is akin to selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in a power-grid environment, for collection, analysis and display, which has been identified as extra solution activity. Therefore, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Dependent claims 2-6 and 8-12 further narrow the abstract ideas, identified in the independent claims, and do not introduce further additional elements for consideration beyond those addressed above.
Step 2B: Claims 1 and 7 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. In Claims 1 and 7, the additional element of “a server”, “a database”, “a portable information terminal”, “a processor” (first and second), “an application software”, similarly recited in the dependent claims, merely uses a computer device as a tool to perform the abstract idea. (MPEP 2106.05(f)) The limitations of “a database configured to store the construction management information including pipe connection information, pipe laying information, and assembled condition management information, of a plurality of assembling sections collected at the pipeline construction site, wherein the plurality of assembling sections includes a cumulative value of deflection angles; and a first processor configured to execute a first application software to: receive data of new construction management information associated with an assembling section: retrieve the stored construction management information associated with the plurality of assembling sections from the database”, “store the generated daily construction report data in the database: and”, “transmit the stored daily construction report to a portable information terminal; the portable information terminal configured to be in communication with the server, the portable information terminal further comprising: a second processor configured to execute an application software to: receive and store in a memory input data corresponding, to a selection of a pipe number for a new assembling section;”, “store in the memory the assigned unique pipe number of the pipe and the unique joint member of the pipe and the connecting pipe of the new assembling section; receive and store in the memory input data corresponding to a type and a laying position of each pipe associated with the stored unique pipe number and the stored unique joint number;”, “store in the memory the generated pipe connection information and the generated pipe laving information; retrieve from the database the cumulative value of deflection angles;”, “dynamically adjust in the memory an allowable range of a deflection angle for pipes that have not yet been input including the pipes of the new assembling section, based upon the retrieved cumulative value of deflection angles stored in the database;”, “store in the memory the adjusted allowable range of the deflection angle for the pipes that have not yet been input including the pipes of the new assembling section: receive and store in the memory input data corresponding to a request for an assembly check;”, “store the confirmation input data in the memory. wherein the stored confirmation input data is associated with the new assembling section: receive and sensor-based protrusion distance measurements data at the new assembling section and compare the measurements data with the stored adjusted allowable range of the deflection angle:” “store in the memory the generated assembled condition management information and transmit to the server the generated pipe connection information, pipe laying information, and assembled condition management information as the data of the new construction management information associated with the assembling section; in response to the transmitting of the data of the new construction management information, receive data corresponding to the stored daily construction report data in the server; and the data corresponding to the stored daily construction report data is stored in the memory and”, similarly recited in claims 1 and 7, “wherein the second processor is configured to execute the second application software to” similarly recited in the dependent claims, as well as the receiving steps of claims2-4 and 8-10, as well as each receive, store and transmit limitation in each of the dependent claims, are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea using a computer in its ordinary capacity, or merely uses the computer as a tool to perform the identified abstract idea. See MPEP (2106.05(f)) Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a mental process) does not amount to significantly more. (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2)) The additional limitation of “display the stored daily construction report data” similarly recited in claims 1 and 7, as well as “display a list of a plurality of available options for the pipe attribute information;” and “display the identified pipe attribute information” in claim 2, as well as “display an evaluation result” in claims 3-4 and 9-10,as well as “displaying a list of a plurality of available options for the pipe attribute information;”, “displaying the pipe attribute information” in claim 8, as well as “display the pipeline construction drawing generated by the pipeline construction drawing generation unit” in claim 11, and “display process of displaying the pipeline construction drawing generated by the pipeline construction drawing generation process” in claim 12, can be viewed as is insignificant extra-solution activity, specifically pertaining to outputting (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and is not sufficient to amount to significantly more. This is akin to selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information in a power-grid environment, for collection, analysis and display, which has been identified as extra solution activity. Therefore, the claim as a whole does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, when considered alone or in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As stated in Section I.B. of the December 16, 2014 101 Examination Guidelines, “[t]o be patent-eligible, a claim that is directed to a judicial exception must include additional features to ensure that the claim describes a process or product that applies the exception in a meaningful way, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.”
The dependent claims include the same abstract ideas recited as recited in the independent claims, and merely incorporate additional details that narrow the abstract ideas and fail to add significantly more to the claims.
Dependent claims 2 and 8 are directed to further defining the reading, acquiring and identification of information, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes.”
Dependent claims 3 and 9 are directed to further defining the generation and evaluation of retraction distances, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes.”
Dependent claims 4 and 10 are directed to further defining the generation and evaluation of protrusion distances, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes.”
Dependent claim 5 is directed to further defining a maximum deflection range, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes.”
Dependent claims 11 and 12 are directed to further defining the generation of a pipe drawing, which further narrows the abstract idea identified in the independent claim, which is directed to “Mental Processes.”
Accordingly, claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without anything significantly more.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Birkner et al. USPPN 2002/0198755: Also teaches management creation device that is updated in real time after taking pictures of components.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MICHAEL COCCHI whose telephone number is (469)295-9079. The examiner can normally be reached 7:15 am - 5:15 pm CT Monday - Thursday.
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, Ryan Pitaro can be reached on 571-272-4071. 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.
/MICHAEL EDWARD COCCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2188