DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This communication is a non-final action in response to the communications filed on 3/6/2026. Claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/6/2026 has been entered.
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 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 are determined to be directed to an abstract idea.
The claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea), without providing a practical application integration and without providing significantly more.
As per Step 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, Claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 are directed to a method (i.e., process), a system (i.e., machine/apparatus), nontransitory medium (i.e., product) which are statutory categories of invention.
As per Step 2A-Prong 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, Claims 1, 19 and 20 are directed specifically to the abstract idea of dynamically visualizing an impact field based on weighted environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics, comprising: obtaining a portfolio including a plurality of assets according to a first configuration, each asset having an associated quantum variable; retrieving for each of the assets a raw ESG score, wherein, for at least one of the assets, … applies a scale conversion to ESG score values retrieved for the asset from a plurality of ESG sources that provide the ESG score values in different scoring scales, to convert the ESG score values to a common scale for deriving the raw ESG score; determining a weighted ESG score for each asset by multiplying the raw ESG score by the quantum variable; forming a first composite ESG score by summing the weighted ESG scores for the assets in the first configuration of the portfolio, wherein at least some of the weighted ESG scores are heterogeneous to each other; visually representing the first configuration of the portfolio by rendering and displaying an impact field having a gradient variable reflective of the first composite ESG score, wherein the gradient variable visually conveys a relative positivity or negativity of the composite ESG score, and wherein the gradient variable is selected from the group consisting of: intensity of a colour, position on a spectrum between two or more colours, number of a positive icon or graphic, number of a negative icon or graphic, and relative balance between positive icons or graphics and negative icons or graphics; making a recommendation on the display for at least one asset in the first configuration; receiving an instruction to reduce or increase the quantum variable of at least one asset, or to drop or add an asset, to form a second configuration of the portfolio; retrieving for any new asset a raw ESG score, wherein, for any new asset for which the ESG score values are retrieved for the new asset from the plurality of ESG sources, … applies the scale conversion to the ESG score values to convert the ESG score values to the common scale for deriving the raw ESG score; determining a weighted ESG score for any new or modified asset by multiplying the raw ESG score by the quantum variable of the new or modified asset; forming a second composite ESG score by summing the weighted ESG scores for the assets in the second configuration of the portfolio, wherein at least some of the weighted ESG scores for the assets in the second configuration of the portfolio are heterogeneous to each other; and visually representing the second configuration of the portfolio by modifying the appearance of the impact field through adjustment of the gradient variable so as to reflect the second composite ESG score, wherein the adjustment of the gradient variable comprises at least one of: changing the intensity of the colour, changing the position on the spectrum between the two or more colours, changing the number of the positive icon or graphic, changing the number of the negative icon or graphic, or changing the relative balance between the positive icons or graphics and negative icons or graphics; which include mental processes (observing, evaluating, ESG metrics/scores and making a judgment and opinion on impact field), certain methods of organizing human activity based on fundamental economic practice (tracking/visualizing impact field based on ESG metrics/scores), and managing personal behavior or interactions between people (following rules and instructions to dynamically facilitate/visualize impact field based on ESG metrics/scores). Claims 2-7, 9-10, 12-18 and 21 are directed to the abstract idea of claim 1 with further details of the abstract idea which includes mental processes and certain methods of organizing human activity for similar reasons as provided above for claim 1. After considering all claim elements, both individually and in combination and in ordered combination, it has been determined that the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
As per Step 2A-Prong 2 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, while the claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements, such as a processor and a display, backend, a terminal communicative with at least one server, the terminal comprising a display, the at least one server comprising a processor, wherein the terminal and the at least one server are collective configured to perform a method, non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon computer program code that is executable by a processor and that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform a method, machine learning, wherein the raw ESG score is retrieved from a database by a backend, outputting the scores to a display of an advisor terminal, displaying on a display of a user device, the display of the user device or the display of the advisor terminal, wherein the raw ESG score for any new asset is retrieved from the database by the backend, outputting the raw ESG score for any new asset and the weighted ESG score for any new or modified asset to the display of the advisor terminal, automatically {modifying}, these limitations are not enough to qualify as a practical application being recited in the claims along with the abstract idea since these elements are merely invoked as a tool to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f)&(h)). The claims do not amount to "practical application" for the abstract idea because they neither (1) recite any improvements to another technology or technical field; (2) recite any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; (3) apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; (4) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; (5) provide other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
As per Step 2B of the subject matter eligibility analysis, while the claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements, such as a processor and a display, backend, a terminal communicative with at least one server, the terminal comprising a display, the at least one server comprising a processor, wherein the terminal and the at least one server are collective configured to perform a method, non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon computer program code that is executable by a processor and that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform a method, machine learning, wherein the raw ESG score is retrieved from a database by a backend, outputting the scores to a display of an advisor terminal, displaying on a display of a user device, the display of the user device or the display of the advisor terminal, wherein the raw ESG score for any new asset is retrieved from the database by the backend, outputting the raw ESG score for any new asset and the weighted ESG score for any new or modified asset to the display of the advisor terminal, automatically {modifying}, these limitations are not enough to qualify as “significantly more” being recited in the claims along with the abstract idea since these elements are merely invoked as a tool to apply instructions of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do provide significantly more to an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05 (f) & (h)). The claims do not amount to "significantly more" than the abstract idea because they neither (1) recite any improvements to another technology or technical field; (2) recite any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; (3) apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; (4) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; (5) add a specific limitation other than what is well-understood, routine and conventional in the field; (6) add unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application; nor (7) provide other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-21 that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually, the claims are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Response to Arguments
Arguments filed on 3/6/2026 have been fully considered. Details are provided below.
Arguments on Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101:
Applicant argues that the claims integrate an abstract idea into a practical application. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
While Applicant’s invention is amended to recite data conversion; it does not pertain to the fact pattern of example 42, specifically it lacks the necessity of converting or normalizing input data/files due to hardware/software incompatibilities, and the need or provisioning of the result in real-time to the interested parties.
Conclusion
Closest prior art to the invention includes:
Litvak-Hinenzon et al. (US 2022/0261819), Krishnaswamy et al. (US 2022/0198565), and Sood et al. (US 2018/0048921) as applied in the rejections in the previous Office actions.
Lalit et al., (US 2022/0027814) discloses a system for synthesizing data from variety sources into a score for performance on environmental, social, and governance issues by evaluating companies to obtain an objective, quantitative score in this manner to facilitate the identification of undervalued companies.
Bateman (US 2016/0117774) discloses a system for calculating individual company ESG scores from the ESG data and weights the company ESG scores based on proportions of the group of companies.
Yan et al., (US 2022/0343433) discloses a method that includes receiving data indicative of an ESG and measurements of ESG components and creating a set of n- games for each ESG component, search a database based on the set of n-games to obtain ESG data and generating an ESG score based on the ESG data.
Rangarajan “Impact Investing: Performance Analysis and Comparison Across Temes”, Master of Science in Computational Finance & Risk Management, University of Washington, 2019.
None of the prior art alone or in combination teaches the claimed invention; wherein the novelty is in the combination of all the limitations and not in a single limitation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHMET YESILDAG whose telephone number is (571)272-3257. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached on (571) 272-6787. 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.
Sincerely,
/MEHMET YESILDAG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624