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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on application CN202210071920.7 filed in China on Jan. 21, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 06/30/2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/22/2025 regarding the rejection under 35 USC 101 have
been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant arguments I – IV are moot due to the 101 rejections partially being withdrawn.
Applicant argues, see especially page 5, (V), that claims 7, are -patent eligible because “The Claims Achieve Real-World Technical Effects The claims ultimately result in preventing defective products through equipment-level actions. This is a physical, real-world effect, not merely information processing.” The examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted below Claim 7 states multiple units (a receiving unit, a prediction unit, a modifying unit, and an adjustment unit) that under the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification include the units comprising of code with no other structure (see specification, paragraph 0016). The MPEP states a non-limiting example of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories: “Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as "data per se") or a computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") when claimed as a product without any structural recitations; ”. Claim 7 is pointed to software per se without any structural recitations due to the recited “units” under there broadest reasonable interpretation being code with no other structure.
The rejection under 35 USC 101 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.
Claims 7-12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it is not clear from the specification if the embodiment of the claimed invention is physical. Claim 7 states multiple units (a receiving unit, a prediction unit, a modifying unit, and an adjustment unit) that under the broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification include the units comprising of code with no other structure (see specification, paragraph 0016). See also Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 449, 82 USPQ2d, 1400, 1402 (2007) (software expressed as code or a set of instructions detached from any medium is an idea without physical embodiment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-12 remain rejected under the 101 rejection state above, however if this rejection were to be overcome these claims would be allowable subject matter.
Claims 1-6 are allowed.
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 THOMAS B LANE whose telephone number is (571)272-1872. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7:20am-5:20pm; F: Out of Office.
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, MARIELA REYES can be reached at (571) 270-1006. 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.
/THOMAS BERNARD LANE/Examiner, Art Unit 2142
/HAIMEI JIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2142
Prosecution Insights