DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recites a method and systems that arrange the presentation and display of Chinese characters, organize the Chinese characters using certain rules and allows the user to study the Chinese characters. In this case, except for the use of “a processor”, “memory”, “high-resolution display”, “display” or “displayed in computer screen” or “interface”, “database” or “pronunciation module”, the context of the claims can be performed in the human mind where a teacher provide a logical arrangement of Chinese character or a type of certain method of human activity since the limitation can be considered a type of teaching or following rules or instruction.
The amendment of “using the processor to automatically calculate Literacy Codes of Chinese characters, the Literacy Codes encoding main paths of Chinese character literacy according to predefined structural rules; and dynamically rendering, on the high-resolution display, layouts of Chinese characters that visually represent relationships between characters based on the Literacy Codes” are also directed to an abstract idea since it can be performed in the human mind where a teacher provide a logical arrangement of Chinese character or a type of certain method of human activity since the limitation can be considered a type of teaching or following rules or instruction.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Independent claims 1 is silent on any explicit recitation of the use of this particular method using a computer. Claims 1, 25 includes a recitation of a display module. However, a recitation of a display module would amount no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. A review of the applicant’s own specification these display module are nothing more than a generic computing device (see specification page 59 last paragraph – page 60 first paragraph). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
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 a display and literacy module to show the Chinese character literacy method. These steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
The dependent limitation of claims 2-24 have also been reviewed for subject matter eligibility. However, claims 2-24 further expound on the abstract idea found in claims 1 and 25. Accordingly, these independent claims are also rejected under 35 U.S.C 101.
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 1-25 are 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 and 25 include limitation directed to a high-resolution computer display. While the specification provides support for having a display device (see paragraph 46, 170, 173), the specification is silent on embodiment that incorporate a high-resolution device.
Specification
The specification amendment filed 10/12/2025 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
“The user can use the terminal device 2301, 2302, 2303 to interact with the server 2305 through the network 2304 to receive or send messages and so on. For example, the server 2305 might contain a web service program that sends the Literacy Codes and Chinese character information calculated in the server to the terminal devices through the network 2304, and the terminal devices display received data in their displays.
The terminal devices 2301, 2302, 2303 may be various electronic devices, including but not limited to smart phones, tablet computers, laptop computers, desktop computers, and so on, that contain a processor to calculate Literacy Codes locally as an option and instruct the layout of Chinese characters, as well as monitor with high resolution to be able to display large amount of Chinese characters and their relationship within one screen as shown in some design charts in this specification.
The server 2305 may be a server that provides various services, such as background services that calculate Literacy Codes for the literacy system and feedback the processing results with various terminal devices 2301, 2302, and 2303.”
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to applicant’s argument that the amendment of “processor, memory and high-resolution display” are no longer an abstract idea since it requires the method or system be performed in a computer. However, the use of a computer as a tool a mental process is not a sufficient to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C 101. Claims can recite a mental process even if they are claimed as being performed on a computer (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)).
The applicant also argued that the claim limitation is directed to a technological environment since it efficiently organizes and present complex Chinese character for literacy instruction. However, improvement to field of literacy instruction is not the type of technical improvement contemplated by MPEP 2106.04(d)(1). The MPEP 2106.04(d)(1) in the context of this consideration is limited to improvements to the functioning of a computer or any other technology/technical field. Improvement to the field of literacy instruction is not sufficient overcome the current rejection under 35 U.S.C 101.
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 ROBERT J UTAMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1676. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 17:30 Monday - Friday.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715