DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on 02/09/2026 has been entered.
3. Currently claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 and 11 have been amended; claims 3, 5-6, 9 and 12-16 have been canceled. Therefore, claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 and 11 are pending in this application.
Prior Art
4. Considering current claim 1 as a whole (including each of the dependent claims), the prior art does not teach or suggest the current claimed system (regarding the state of the prior art, see the office-action dated 06/21/2024).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
5. Non-Statutory (Directed to a Judicial Exception without an Inventive Concept/Significantly More)
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, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
(Step 1)
The current claims fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (MPEP 2106.03).
(Step 2A) [Wingdings font/0xE0] Prong One:
The claim(s) recite a judicial exception, namely an abstract idea, as shown below:
— Considering claim 1 as the representative claim, the following claimed limitations recite an abstract idea:
[collect] reference experiment information from a plurality of previously performed experiments, wherein each reference experiment information comprises reagent identification and time-series internal environment information that was recorded during a respective previously performed experiment;
receive user location information and user experiment information, wherein the user experiment information includes identification of one or more reagents to be used in a current experiment;
determine whether the user is located in a laboratory based on the user location information;
receive location information of [a] laboratory equipment and internal environment information of the laboratory, wherein the internal environment information includes at least one or ac concentration of harmful gas, a temperature information;
retrieve reference experiment information corresponding to previously performed experiments that used the same reagent as identified in the user experiment information, wherein the reference experiment information is accumulated as experiments are continuously performed;
generate a time-period-specific prediction of internal environment information of the laboratory for each of a plurality of sequential time periods during the current experiment by:
analyzing a similarity between reagent information included in the user experiment information and reagent information included in the retrieved reference experiment information,
apply the similarity to previous internal environment information of the laboratory related to the retrieved reference experiment information to generate predicted internal environment values for each of the plurality of sequential time periods
correct the predicted internal environment values with the [current] internal environment information of the laboratory as the [current] internal environment information is received during the current experiment;
[provide] experiment guide information to the user based on the user location information, the user experiment information, the location information of the laboratory equipment, and the time-period-specific prediction of internal environment information, wherein the experiment guide information includes:
a material safety data sheet for the one or more reagents identified in the user experiment information,
an instruction to perform the current experiment in a fume hood when it is determined, based on the time-period-specific prediction, a high-risk group harmful gas during the current experiment, and
the internal environment information of the laboratory and the time-period-specific prediction of internal environment information for the plurality of sequential time periods during the current experiment; and
[provide] access [to] the user based the user experiment information related to the reagents to be used by the user for the current experiment.
Thus, the limitations identified above recite an abstract idea since the limitations correspond to certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or mental processes, which are part of the enumerated groupings of abstract ideas identified according to the current eligibility standard (see MPEP 2106.04(a)).
For instance, the current claims correspond to managing personal behavior, such as teaching, wherein a user is provided with experiment guide information based on one or more conditions—such as: the user’s experiment information, the user’s location, the location of a laboratory equipment, a reference experiment information, current and/or predicted internal environment information of the laboratory, etc., and wherein the user’s ability to access materials for the experiment, including one or more environmental factors related to the experiment are adjusted based on the state of the experiment being conducted, etc.
Similarly, given the limitations that recite the process of colleting and/or storing reference experiment information from a plurality of previously performed experiments, wherein each reference experiment information comprises reagent identification and time-series internal environment information that was recorded during a respective previously performed experiment; retrieving reference experiment information corresponding to previously performed experiments that used the same reagent as identified in the user experiment information; predicting a time-period-specific prediction of internal environment information of the laboratory for each of a plurality of sequential time periods during the current experiment, etc., the current claims also correspond to a mental process—i.e., a concept that can be performed in the human mind and/or using a pen and paper (e.g., an observation, evaluation, a judgment, etc.).
(Step 2A) [Wingdings font/0xE0] Prong Two:
The claim(s) recite additional elements, wherein a user terminal, a laboratory equipment, a communication network, a display, (a smart table), a plurality of sensors, etc., are utilized to facilitate one or more of the recited steps regarding: storing information (e.g., “a memory storing instructions and accumulated reference experiment information from a plurality of previously performed experiments . . . information that was recorded during a respective previously performed experiment”); collecting information regarding the a user, equipment and/or environment (e.g., “receiving user location information and user experiment information from a user terminal, wherein the user experiment information includes identification of one or more reagents to be used in a current experiment; receiving, from one or more sensors, location information of laboratory equipment and real-time internal environment information of a laboratory, wherein the real-time internal environment information includes at least one of: a concentration of a harmful gas . . . and temperature information”; “retrieving, from the memory, reference experiment information corresponding to previously performed experiments that used the same reagent as identified in the user experiment information, wherein the reference experiment information is accumulated as experiments are continuously performed”); determining the user’s location based on collected information (“determining whether a user is located in the laboratory based on the user location information”); processing or analyzing collected information to generate one or more results (“generating a time-period-specific prediction of internal environment information of the laboratory for each of a plurality of sequential time periods during the current experiment by: (i) analyzing a similarity between reagent information . . . (ii) applying the similarity to previous internal environment information of the laboratory related to the retrieved reference experiment information . . . (iii) correcting the predicted internal environment values with the real-time internal environment information of the laboratory as the real-time internal environment information is received during the current experiment”); providing guidance based on the analysis result(s) of the collected information (“causing the display to generate experiment guide information to the user based on the user location information, the user experiment information, the location information of the laboratory equipment, and the time-period-specific prediction of internal environment information, wherein the experiment guide information includes a material safety data sheet for the one or more reagents identified in the user experiment information, an instruction to perform the current experiment in a fume hood when it is determined, based on the time-period-specific prediction, that a high-risk group harmful gas will be generated . . . sequential time periods during the current experiment”); controlling one or more devices (“automatically controlling operation of the laboratory equipment based on the time-period-specific prediction of internal environment information by: (a) actuating a locking device of a reagent cabinet in the laboratory to adjust an access region of the user in the reagent cabinet . . . (b) controlling at least one of a harmful gas purification device, the fume hood, and conditioning equipment to adjust air quality . . . wherein the laboratory equipment includes the reagent cabinet, a smart table . . . wherein the automatically controlling of operation of the laboratory equipment based on the time-period-specific prediction enables preemptive adjustment of laboratory conditions before hazardous conditions develop”), etc.
However, the claimed additional elements fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application since the additional elements are utilized merely as a tool to facilitate the abstract idea. Thus, when each claim is considered as a whole, the additional elements fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application since they fail to impose meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. For instance, when each of the claims is considered as a whole, none of the claims provides an improvement over the relevant existing technology.
Although the claims recite one or more sensors, the sensors are utilized merely for data gathering purpose while they are expressed in high level of generality. Accordingly, such implementation is directed to insignificant extra-solution activity.
The observations above confirm that the claims are indeed directed to an abstract idea.
(Step 2B)
Accordingly, when the claim(s) is considered as a whole (i.e., considering all claim elements both individually and in combination), the claimed additional elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to “significantly more” than the abstract idea itself (also see MPEP 2106). The claimed additional elements are directed to conventional computer elements, which are serving merely to perform conventional computer functions. Accordingly, none of the current claims recites an element—or a combination of elements—directed to an inventive concept.
Note also that the use of the conventional computer/network technology to facilitate the delivery of pertinent information (e.g. experiment guide, etc.) to the user, based on the analysis collected data (e.g. collected data regarding the user, the task the user is performing, the device/equipment being used to perform the task, etc.), including the process of controlling one or more of the devices utilized to perform the task, etc., is already directed to a well-understood, routine or conventional activity in the art (e.g. see US 2016/0357765; KR 10-1746515, etc.).
The above observation confirms that the current claimed invention fails to amount to “significantly more” than an abstract idea.
It is worth noting that the above analysis already encompasses each of the current dependent claims (i.e., claims 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 and 11). Particularly, each of the dependent claims also fails to amount to “significantly more” than the abstract idea since each dependent claim is directed to a further abstract idea, and/or a further conventional computer element/function utilized to facilitate the abstract idea.
Accordingly, none of the claims, when considered as a whole, is implementing an element—or a combination of elements—directed to an inventive concept (e.g., none of the claims implements an element—or a combination of elements—that provides a technological improvement over the conventional computer/network technology).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUK A GEBREMICHAEL whose telephone number is (571) 270-3079. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:00AM-3:00PM.
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, DAVID LEWIS can be reached on (571) 272-7673. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRUK A GEBREMICHAEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715