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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The amended elements into independent claims 1 and 4 are substantially similar to elements from previously presented claim 3.
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 1-8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental processes without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-6 recite methods, claims 7 and 8 recite a computer system which are all eligible categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong 1
Claim 1 recites generating the diagnosis pattern…identifying a node-core relationship, diagnosis and identification are mental processes, making determinations/observations. Calculation components are mathematical concepts.
Claim 2 recites Identifying for each of the calculation components and selecting for each of the calculation components which are mental processes and mathematical concepts.
Claim 3 recites specifying, which is interpreted as a mental process similar to deciding and selecting any one of the data sets.
Claim 4 recites the same mental processes and mathematical concepts as claim 1.
Claim 5 recites (AVF) that is a ratio of an error bit to all bits of the calculation result which is a mathematical concept.
Claim 6 recites selecting a node which is a mental process, and an equation which is mathematical.
Claim 7 recites calculation processing, mathematical concept and diagnose the second processor, a diagnosis is a decision/determination.
Claim 8 also recites execute calculation processing and diagnose the second processor.
Step 2A Prong 2
The claims include the additional elements of processors, storage units and neural network, which are merely instructions to perform the abstract idea on a generic computer. The elements input values, expected values, and reducing a number of data sets are merely extra solution activity, data gathering and manipulation. Describing what data is used to make the calculation or determination doesn’t remove it from the scope of a mental process.
Step 2B
The processors, storage units and neural networks are described with a high level of generality. The data set including a diagnosis input value and expected output value are just data to be input and output, no further limitation is required for what the expected output is to make it more than extra solution activity (MPEP 2106.(d)(II)). The generation of data sets is also mere data output. The AVF is an error bit ratio can be calculated by a human with pen and paper with information gathered from the computer, limitations regarding other calculations are described with a high level of generality.
Allowable Subject Matter
As previously indicated, claims 1-8 are not rejected over the prior art and would be allowable if amended to overcome current rejections.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure US 20230196743 and US 20200192973.
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 SEAN KEVIN MCNAMARA whose telephone number is (703)756-1884. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00 EST.
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at 571-272-3655. 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.
/SEAN KEVIN MCNAMARA/Examiner, Art Unit 2113
/PHILIP GUYTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113
Prosecution Insights