DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This non-final office action is in response to the RCE and amendment filed 31 March 2025.
Claims 2-21 are pending. Claims 2 and 12 are independent claims.
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 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1:
According to Step 1 of the two Step analysis, claims 2-11 are directed toward a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (manufacture). Claims 12-21 are directed toward a system (machine). Therefore, each of these claims falls within one of the four statutory categories.
Claim 2:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites in part:
extracting a plurality of entries from the electronically stored information (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses performing an observation of stored information to identify entities)
researching whether an entity of the plurality of entities has participated in a transaction regarding a particular stock (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses performing a judgement to determine whether an entity has participated in a transaction regarding a particular stock)
accessing accounts of each entity of the plurality of entities (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses observing data entries associated with accounts of each entities)
identifying a plurality of threads from the electronically stored information (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses performing an evaluation to identify a plurality of threads from the electronically stored information)
in a relationship builder comprising an indexing engine: determining a plurality of relationships among the plurality of entities according to the plurality of threads and the accessed accounts, wherein determining the plurality of relationships comprises correlating a communication event from a thread with a transaction event from an accessed account based on a common entity and a temporal proximity constraint (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses performing an evaluation to determine a plurality of relations based upon correlating communication events from a thread with a transaction event from an accessed account)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
The claim recites the elements:
a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium encoded with instructions executable by a processor of a computing device, the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium comprising instructions to perform a method for presenting information
This limitation is 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 (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim recites the elements:
producing a map to electronically store information
in a semantic processor comprising a similarity engine
These limitations amount to generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (processing tree based structures to identify relationships between data). As explained by the Supreme Court, a claim directed to a judicial exception cannot be made eligible "simply by having the applicant acquiesce to limiting the reach of the patent for the formula to a particular technological use." Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 192 n.14, 209 USPQ 1, 10 n. 14 (1981). Thus, limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.05(h))
The claim recites the elements:
in a visualization processor comprising a search engine:
displaying the relationships of messages or transactions in the thread as a multidimensional spatial-temporal map that simultaneously presents communications and transactions in two or three dimensions, the presentation permitting incremental updates without reloading a dataset, thereby reducing processor cycles and network bandwidth compared to conventional message-thread displays, wherein:
the incremental updates comprise updating only relationships nodes affected by newly received communication events or transaction events without regenerating unaffected portions of the map
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a root originator
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a first piece of data from the root originator
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a second piece of data in response to the root originator
the plurality of relationships comprises a plurality of relationship types
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a particular color
a rectangular box colored in a lighter shade of the particular color indicates that a recipient has received the second piece of data
selection of a node in the multidimensional spatial-temporal map causes automatic expansion of both related communication branches and related transaction branches associated with the selected node
Additionally, the claim recites the additional element of “providing the output and the identified portion of the received input corresponding to the determined bias at the interface on the computing device”. These limitations also amount to extra solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim, amounting to mere data output (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The courts have similarly found limitations directed to displaying a result, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics.", “determining an estimated outcome and setting a price”).
Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do no integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
In accordance with Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more that the judicial exception.
The claim recites the elements:
a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium encoded with instructions executable by a processor of a computing device, the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium comprising instructions to perform a method for presenting information
This limitation is 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 (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim recites the elements:
producing a map to electronically store information
in a semantic processor comprising a similarity engine
These limitations amount to generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (processing tree based structures to identify relationships between data). As explained by the Supreme Court, a claim directed to a judicial exception cannot be made eligible "simply by having the applicant acquiesce to limiting the reach of the patent for the formula to a particular technological use." Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 192 n.14, 209 USPQ 1, 10 n. 14 (1981). Thus, limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.05(h))
The claim recites the elements:
in a visualization processor comprising a search engine:
displaying the relationships of messages or transactions in the thread as a multidimensional spatial-temporal map that simultaneously presents communications and transactions in two or three dimensions, the presentation permitting incremental updates without reloading a dataset, thereby reducing processor cycles and network bandwidth compared to conventional message-thread displays, wherein:
the incremental updates comprise updating only relationships nodes affected by newly received communication events or transaction events without regenerating unaffected portions of the map
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a root originator
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a first piece of data from the root originator
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a second piece of data in response to the root originator
the plurality of relationships comprises a plurality of relationship types
each of the plurality of threads is associated with a particular color
a rectangular box colored in a lighter shade of the particular color indicates that a recipient has received the second piece of data
selection of a node in the multidimensional spatial-temporal map causes automatic expansion of both related communication branches and related transaction branches associated with the selected node
Additionally, the claim recites the additional element of “providing the output and the identified portion of the received input corresponding to the determined bias at the interface on the computing device”. These limitations also amount to extra solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim, amounting to mere data output (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The courts have similarly found limitations directed to displaying a result, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics.", “determining an estimated outcome and setting a price”).
Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim 3:
With respect to claims 3, the claims depend upon claim 2 . The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites:
wherein each of the plurality of threads comprises one or more messages from multiple types of communications (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses processing the data to observe information included in a thread. In this instance, the observed information includes one or more messages from multiple types of communications)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Step 2B:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2B.
Claim 4:
With respect to claim 4, the claim depend upon claim 2. The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites:
wherein each of the plurality of threads comprises a financial information thread that is displayed independently from a communication thread (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses processing the data to observe information included in a thread. In this instance, the observed information includes observing financial information in a displayed thread)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Step 2B:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2B.
Claim 5:
With respect to claim 5, the claims depend upon claims 2. The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites:
wherein the method comprises using a feedback loop to identify a document related to a relationship of the plurality of relationships (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses processing the data by performing the observation, in a looping manner, to identify relationships)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Step 2B:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2B.
Claim 6:
With respect to claim 6, the claim depend upon claim 2. The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites:
wherein the method comprises identifying a new message related to a relationship of the plurality of relationships (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses processing the data to observe new message data related to a plurality of relationships (evaluation))
Step 2A, Prong 2:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Step 2B:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2B.
Claim 7:
With respect to claim 7, the claims depend upon claim 2. The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim is directed toward the same abstract idea identified with respect to claim 2.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
The claim recites the elements:
wherein the method comprises displaying a graph of a relationship of a selected relationship type
This limitation amounts to extra solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim, amounting to mere data output (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have similarly found limitations directed to displaying a result, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics.", “determining an estimated outcome and setting a price”).
Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do no integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
In accordance with Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more that the judicial exception.
The additional element of “displaying a graph of a relationship of a selected relationship type.” These limitations also amount to extra solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim, amounting to mere data output (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have similarly found limitations directed to displaying a result, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics.", “determining an estimated outcome and setting a price”).
Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim 8:
With respect to claim 8, the claim depend upon claim 2. The evaluation for claims 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim is directed toward the same abstract idea identified with respect to claim 2.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
With respect to claims 8 and 18, the claims recite:
wherein the method comprises overlaying a financial thread on a travel thread
This limitation amounts to extra solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim, amounting to mere data output (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The courts have similarly found limitations directed to displaying a result, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics.", “determining an estimated outcome and setting a price”).
Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do no integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
In accordance with Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more that the judicial exception.
The additional element of “wherein the method comprises overlaying a financial thread on a travel thread.” These limitations also amount to extra solution activity because it is a mere nominal or tangential addition to the claim, amounting to mere data output (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). The courts have similarly found limitations directed to displaying a result, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), "presenting offers and gathering statistics.", “determining an estimated outcome and setting a price”).
Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim 9:
With respect to claim 9, the claim depends upon claim 2 . The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites:
wherein the method comprises selectively normalizing a time history of the plurality of relationships (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses processing the data by performing a judgement on whether to normalize (evaluation) a time history of the relationship)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Step 2B:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2B.
Claim 10:
With respect to claim 10, the claim depend upon claim 2. The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites:
wherein the plurality of entities are determined by a noun-phrase concept (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses processing the data by performing a judgement to determine entities based upon a noun-phrase concept)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Step 2B:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2B.
Claim 11:
With respect to claim 11, the claim depend upon claim 2. The analysis of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim recites:
wherein the plurality of relationship types comprises a financial relationship (mental process; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses processing the data by performing the observation of financial relationship data)
Step 2A, Prong 2:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2A, Prong 2.
Step 2B:
There are no additional limitations considered under Step 2B.
Claims 12-21:
With respect to claims 12-21, the claims recite the limitations substantially similar to those in claims 2-11, respectively. The analysis of claims 2-11 is incorporated herein.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claim is directed toward the same abstract idea identified with respect to claims 2-11, respectively.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Claim 12 recites the additional elements:
a memory operable to store information and a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium
a semantic processor… operable to execute encoded instructions on the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium
This limitation is 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 (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Accordingly, at Step 2A, prong two, the additional elements individually or in combination do no integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
In accordance with Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more that the judicial exception.
Claim 12 recites the additional elements:
a memory operable to store information and a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium
a semantic processor… operable to execute encoded instructions on the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium
This limitation is 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 (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Accordingly, at Step 2B the additional elements individually or in combination do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments in view of the amendments filed 31 March 2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims under 35 USC 103 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Lo (US 6738804): Discloses dynamic refresh of data (Figure 2A) where the data may include tasks such as buying a stock (column 1, lines 31-40)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE R STORK whose telephone number is (571)272-4130. The examiner can normally be reached 8am - 2pm; 4pm - 6pm.
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, Omar Fernandez Rivas can be reached at 571/272-2589. 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.
/KYLE R STORK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2128
Prosecution Insights