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 Amendment
The following is in response to the amendment filed on November 11, 2025.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite mental processes. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as explained below.
Step 1 for all Claims:
Claims 1-19 are directed to a machine. Claim 20 is directed to a process. Therefore, Claims 1-20 are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Regarding Claim 1:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Predicting… a first probability of a second user associated with the user device interacting with a first product and/or service, the predicting of the first probability including the predictive model correlating a personal data set of the second user to the personal data set of at least one of the first users; (predicting a probability is a mental process)
generating a plurality of test personal data sets with respect to the second user, each of the test personal data sets including one or more data entries changed in value or state from the personal data set of the second user, the change in the value or state of each of the one or more data entries corresponding to a respective change in a relationship between the second user and a first entity, wherein at least one of the test personal data sets includes a change in value or state of a combination of two or more of the data entries of the personal data set of the second user; (generating data sets is a mental process)
predicting… a plurality of test probabilities of the second user interacting with the first product and/or service, the predicting of each of the test probabilities including … correlating the associated test personal data set of the second user to the personal data set of at least one of the first users; (predicting test probabilities is a mental process)
determining a subset of the plurality of test probabilities, each of the test probabilities forming the subset exceeding each of: the first probability, and a threshold probability value; and (determining a subset of test probabilities is a mental process)
automatically changing, …, each of the relationships present between the second user and the first entity that correspond to the changed data entries of the test personal data set associated with one of the test probabilities forming the subset of test probabilities. (changing relationships between a user and entity is a mental process)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
A system for guiding interactions with a user device, the system comprising:
a computer with one or more processor and memory, wherein the computer executes computer-readable instructions to guide the interactions with the user device;
and a network connection operatively connecting the user device to the computer;
wherein, upon execution of the computer-readable instructions, the computer performs steps comprising:
generating a predictive model during training of a machine learning program utilizing at least one neural network, a training data set utilized during the training of the machine learning program comprising a personal data set of each of a plurality of first users;
…by the predictive model… (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component).
Step 2B:
A system for guiding interactions with a user device, the system comprising:
a computer with one or more processor and memory, wherein the computer executes computer-readable instructions to guide the interactions with the user device; and
a network connection operatively connecting the user device to the computer;
wherein, upon execution of the computer-readable instructions, the computer performs steps comprising:
generating a predictive model during training of a machine learning program utilizing at least one neural network, a training data set utilized during the training of the machine learning program comprising a personal data set of each of a plurality of first users;
…by the predictive model… (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component)
The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 2:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the training of the machine learning program includes unsupervised learning wherein each of the entries of the training data set is unlabeled (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the training of the machine learning program includes unsupervised learning wherein each of the entries of the training data set is unlabeled (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 3:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the machine learning program is configured to perform cluster analysis with respect to the training data set during the training of the predictive model (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the machine learning program is configured to perform cluster analysis with respect to the training data set during the training of the predictive model (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 4:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the at least one neural network generates a self-organizing map (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the at least one neural network generates a self-organizing map (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 5:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the training of the machine learning program includes supervised learning with each of the entries of the training data set being labeled (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the training of the machine learning program includes supervised learning with each of the entries of the training data set being labeled (MPEP 2106.05(f) computer implementation which are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 7:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the content relating to the change in the relationship between the second user and the first entity includes a request to adjust an account setting of the second user relating to the form, frequency, or content of future communications occurring between the second user and the first entity (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the content relating to the change in the relationship between the second user and the first entity includes a request to adjust an account setting of the second user relating to the form, frequency, or content of future communications occurring between the second user and the first entity (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 8:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the content relating to the change in the relationship between the second user and the first entity includes an offer for sale of a second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the content relating to the change in the relationship between the second user and the first entity includes an offer for sale of a second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 9:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claims 8 and 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 8, wherein the first product and/or service is an upsell or a cross-sell relative to the second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 8, wherein the first product and/or service is an upsell or a cross-sell relative to the second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 10:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the second user interacting with the first product and/or service includes the second user purchasing the first product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the second user interacting with the first product and/or service includes the second user purchasing the first product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 11:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the second user interacting with the first product and/or service includes the second user requesting educational material regarding the first product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the second user interacting with the first product and/or service includes the second user requesting educational material regarding the first product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 14:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the personal data set of each of the first users includes a purchase data entry relating to whether the corresponding first user has previously purchased a second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the personal data set of each of the first users includes a purchase data entry relating to whether the corresponding first user has previously purchased a second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 15:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claims 14 and 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 14, wherein at least one of the personal data sets of the plurality of the first users includes a frequency data entry relating to the frequency of use of the first product and/or service or the second product and/or service. (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 14, wherein at least one of the personal data sets of the plurality of the first users includes a frequency data entry relating to the frequency of use of the first product and/or service or the second product and/or service. (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 16:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claims 14 and 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 14, wherein the first product and/or service is an upsell or a cross-sell relative to the second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 14, wherein the first product and/or service is an upsell or a cross-sell relative to the second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 17:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The system of Claim 14, wherein the predicting of the first probability is triggered by a purchase data entry of the personal data set of the second user indicating the purchase of the second product and/or service (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) Examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. Judgements, particularly “collecting information, analyzing it…” are mental processes).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
Refer to Claims 14 and 1.
Step 2B:
The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 18:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the personal data set of each of the first users includes demographic data (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the personal data set of each of the first users includes demographic data (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 19:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Refer to Claim 1.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the personal data set of each of the first users includes a transaction history of the corresponding first user (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims).
Step 2B:
The system of Claim 1, wherein the personal data set of each of the first users includes a transaction history of the corresponding first user (MPEP 2106.05(h) the limitation merely confines the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims). The claim does not recite any additional elements, alone or in combination, that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Regarding Claim 20:
It is rejected under the same rationale of Claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Applicant argues “This defined process constitutes a technological improvement because the system performs a novel computational technique: it automatically generates and evaluates a counterfactual data states using a predictive model, and applies the results to dynamically update operational relationships. These steps are not a mental process or mere data manipulation – they define a machine learning control loop that adapts model-informed relationships in real time, enhancing the efficiency and accuracy of predictive systems.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The instant amended limitations have been analyzed as abstract ideas (please see above for complete rejections). As a first point applicant does not point to support in the specification for the improvement to the technology, per MPEP 2106.05(a) the improvement should be presented (and pointed to) in the specification. Additionally, it is important to note that the judicial exception cannot provide the improvement. Currently the claim limitations that provide the improvement, according to applicant’s arguments, have been analyzed as an exception.
Conclusion
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 MARIELA D REYES whose telephone number is (571)270-1006. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30 am -5:00 pm.
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 Wiley can be reached at (571) 272-4150. 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.
/Mariela Reyes/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2142
Prosecution Insights