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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of the Claims
The pending claims in the present application are claims 1, 4-8, 11-15, 19, 20, 22, and 42-49 of the Response filed 28 November 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, 4-8, 11-15, 19, 20, 22, and 42-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The paragraphs below provide rationales for the rejection. The rationales are based on the multi-step subject matter eligibility test outlined in MPEP 2106.
Step 1 of the eligibility analysis involves determining whether a claim falls within one of the four enumerated categories of patentable subject matter recited in 35 USC 101. (See MPEP 2106.03(I).) That is, Step 1 asks whether a claim is to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. (See MPEP 2106.03(II).) Referring to the pending claims, the “apparatus” of claims 1, 4-8, 11-14, 42-45, and 49 constitutes a machine under 35 USC 101, and the “non-transitory machine-readable medium” of claims 15, 19, 20, 22, and 46-48 constitutes a manufacture under the statute. Accordingly, claims 1, 4-8, 11-15, 19, 20, 22, and 42-49 meet the criteria of Step 1 of the eligibility analysis. The claims, however, fail to meet the criteria of subsequent steps of the eligibility analysis, as explained in the paragraphs below.
The next step of the eligibility analysis, Step 2A, involves determining whether a claim is directed to a judicial exception. (See MPEP 2106.04(II).) This step asks whether a claim is directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon (product of nature) or an abstract idea. (See id.) Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry. (See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A).) Prong One and Prong Two are addressed below.
In the context of Step 2A of the eligibility analysis, Prong One asks whether a claim recites an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon. (See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1).) Using independent claim 1 as an example, the claim recites the following abstract idea limitations:
“... responsive to a first data request, execute a shift analysis model to generate shift analysis data; ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
“... generate a multi-dimensional data structure including the shift analysis data corresponding to outputs of the shift analysis model; ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
“... generate ... based on first data in the shift analysis data associated with the first data request, ... a multi-dimensional data visualization to represent shift trends among objects and entities in a consolidated view, the multi-dimensional data visualization including a chord chart having outer elements, inner elements nested within the outer elements, and directed chords connecting ones of the inner elements, ... including: ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
“... the outer elements representing different ones of the entities; ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
“... the inner elements representing ones of the objects associated with the different ones of the entities; and ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
“... the directed chords between ones of the inner elements with a first visual characteristic representing directions of respective shifts among the objects relative to the entities; ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
“... responsive to a second data request, query the multi-dimensional data structure to identify second data in the shift analysis data associated with the second data request without re-executing the shift analysis model; ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
“... cause an adjustment ... to generate ... based on the second data in the shift analysis data; and ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.04(a), certain methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes
The above-listed limitations of independent claim 1, when applying their broadest reasonable interpretations in light of their context in the claim as a whole, fall under enumerated groupings of abstract ideas outlined in MPEP 2106.04(a). For example, limitations of the claim can be characterized as: fundamental economic principles or practices, including market analysis; and commercial interactions, including trend analysis for sales activities or behaviors; which fall under the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping of abstract ideas (see MPEP 2106.04(a)). Limitations of the claim also can be characterized as: concepts performed in the human mind, including evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion (e.g., the recited “execute,” “generate,” “query,” and “cause” limitations), which fall under the mental processes grouping of abstract ideas (see MPEP 2106.04(a)). Accordingly, for at least these reasons, claim 1 fails to meet the criteria of Step 2A, Prong One of the eligibility analysis.
In the context of Step 2A of the eligibility analysis, Prong Two asks if the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. (See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2).) Continuing to use independent claim 1 as an example, the claim recites the following additional element limitations:
“An apparatus to generate an interactive graphical interface, the apparatus comprising: interface circuitry; machine readable instructions; and at least one processor circuit to be programmed by the machine readable instructions to at least: ...” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) and (f)-(h)
The claimed “generate” is of “a first graphical interface” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) and (f)-(h)
The claimed “multi-dimensional data visualization” is included in the “first graphical interface” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) and (f)-(h)
The claimed “outer elements,” “inner elements,” and “chords” are included in the “first graphical interface” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) and (f)-(h)
The claimed “adjustment” is to “the first graphical interface” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) and (f)-(h)
The claimed “generate” is of “a second graphical interface” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) and (f)-(h)
“... output the second graphical interface.” - See below regarding MPEP 2106.05(a)-(c) and (f)-(h)
The above-listed additional element limitations of independent claim 1, when applying their broadest reasonable interpretations in light of their context in the claim as a whole, are analogous to: accelerating a process of analyzing audit log data when the increased speed comes solely from the capabilities of a general-purpose computer, mere automation of manual processes, instructions to display two sets of information on a computer display in a non-interfering manner, without any limitations specifying how to achieve the desired result, and arranging transactional information on a graphical user interface in a manner that assists traders in processing information more quickly, which courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement in computer-functionality (see MPEP 2106.05(a)(I)); a commonplace business method being applied on a general purpose computer, gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result, and selecting a particular generic function for computer hardware to perform from within a range of fundamental or commonplace functions performed by the hardware, which courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement to technology (see MPEP 2106.05(a)(II)); a general purpose computer that applies a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea, by use of conventional computer functions, and merely adding a generic computer, generic computer components, or a programmed computer to perform generic computer functions, which do not qualify as a particular machine or use thereof (see MPEP 2106.05(b)(I)); a machine that is merely an object on which the method operates, which does not integrate the exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(b)(II)); use of a machine that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method, which does not integrate a judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(b)(III)); transformation of an intangible concept such as a contractual obligation or mental judgment, which is not likely to provide significantly more (see MPEP 2106.05(c)); remotely accessing user-specific information through a mobile interface and pointers to retrieve the information without any description of how the mobile interface and pointers accomplish the result of retrieving previously inaccessible information, which courts have found to be mere instructions to apply an exception, because they recite no more than an idea of a solution or outcome (see MPEP 2106.05(f)); use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea, a commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer, and requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer, which courts have found to be mere instructions to apply an exception, because they do no more than merely invoke computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process (see MPEP 2106.05(f)); mere data gathering in the form of obtaining information about transactions using the Internet to verify transactions and consulting and updating an activity log, which courts have found to be insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)); and specifying that the abstract idea of monitoring audit log data relates to transactions or activities that are executed in a computer environment, because this requirement merely limits the claims to the computer field, i.e., to execution on a generic computer, and limiting the abstract idea of collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data related to the electric power grid, because limiting application of the abstract idea to power-grid monitoring is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, which courts have described as merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). For at least these reasons, claim 1 fails to meet the criteria of Step 2A, Prong Two of the eligibility analysis.
The next step of the eligibility analysis, Step 2B, asks whether a claim recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. (See MPEP 2106.05(II).) The step involves identifying whether there are any additional elements in the claim beyond the judicial exceptions, and evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they contribute an inventive concept. (See id.) The ineligibility rationales applied at Step 2A, Prong Two, also apply to Step 2B. (See id.) For all of the reasons covered in the analysis performed at Step 2A, Prong Two, independent claim 1 fails to meet the criteria of Step 2B. Further, claim 1 also fails to meet the criteria of Step 2B because at least some of the additional elements are analogous to: receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, and storing and retrieving information in memory, which courts have recognized as well-understood, routine, conventional activity, and as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)). As a result, claim 1 is rejected under 35 USC 101 as ineligible for patenting.
Regarding claims 4-8, 11-14, 42-45, and 49, the claims depend from independent claim 1, and expand upon limitations introduced by claim 1. The dependent claims are rejected at least for the same reasons as claim 1. For example, the dependent claims recite abstract idea elements similar to the abstract idea elements of claim 1, that fall under the same abstract idea groupings as the abstract idea elements of claim 1 (e.g., the “wherein respective ones of the outer elements and the inner elements include a respective second visual characteristic representative of a corresponding one of the shift trends” of claim 5, the recited “generating first ones of the inner elements with a first color, the first ones of the inner elements associated with a first one of the shift trends, the first one of the shift trends corresponding to growth; and generating second ones of the inner elements with a second color that is different than the first color, the second ones of the inner elements associated with a second one of the shift trends, the second one of the shift trends corresponds to decline” of claim 6, the recited “generate third ones of the inner elements with a third color that is different than the first and second colors, the third color indicative of no shift” of claim 7, the “generating a first side of a first one of the directed chords with a first one of the inner elements based on the shift analysis data, the first side including a first color indicative of growth; and generating a second side of the first one of the directed chords with a second one of the inner elements based on the shift analysis data, the second side including a second color indicative of decline, the first one of the directed chords being indicative of a shift from the second one of the inner elements to the first one of the inner elements” of claim 8, the “generate a legend based on a first portion of the shift analysis data that corresponds to a first one of the objects; and present the legend” of claim 11, the “based on the third data request corresponding to a pin request for a first one of the inner elements, cause exaggeration of the first one of the inner elements, a first one of the directed chords extending from the first one of the inner elements, and a second one of the inner elements to which the first one of the directed chords extends” of claim 12, the “retrieving, from the multi-dimensional data structure, third date of the shift analysis data corresponding to a first one of the respective shifts ...; and generating a ... visual that identifies the first one of the respective shifts” of claim 13, the “wherein the multi-dimensional data visualization is a first data visualization, ... a second multi-dimension data visualization presented as a bubble chart, the bubble chart including bubbles to represent combinations of the objects and the entities relative to respective net shifting values and incrementality values, ... generating the second multi-dimensional data visualization as a sortable table, the sortable table to include first shift analysis data that is plotted in the bubble chart” of claim 14, the “wherein the chord chart includes: a first one of the outer elements representing a first entity of the entities; a second one of the outer elements representing a second entity of the entities; a first one of the inner elements representing a first object of the objects; a second one of the inner elements representing a second object of the objects, the first and second ones of the inner elements nested within the first one of the outer elements; a third one of the inner elements representing the first object; and a fourth one of the inner elements representing the second object, the third and fourth one of the inner elements nested within the second one of the outer elements” of claim 42, the “wherein the chord chart includes one or more of (a) a first one of the directed chords extending between the first one of the inner elements and the second one of the inner elements to represent a respective shift between the first object and the second object within the first entity, (b) a second one of the directed chords extending between the first one of the inner elements and the third one of the inner elements to represent a respective shift between the first object relative to the first entity and the first object relative to the second entity, and (c) a third one of the directed chords extending between the first one of the inner elements and the fourth one of the inner elements to represent a respective shift between the first object relative to the first entity and the second object relative to the second entity” of claim 43, the “wherein the multi-dimensional data structure includes a data cube” of claim 44, the “generate specifications data structures based on ... selections, the specifications data structures defining associations between the multi-dimensional data visualization and the multi-dimensional data structure” of claim 45, and the “wherein the multi-dimensional data visualization is rendered as a pivoted chord chart ..., the pivoted chord chart including: the outer elements representing different ones of the objects; the inner elements representing ones of the entities associated with the different ones of the objects; and the directed chords between ones of the inner elements with the first visual characteristic to represent directions of respective shifts among the entities relative to the objects” of claim 49). The dependent claims recite further additional elements that are similar to the additional elements of claim 1, that fail to warrant eligibility for the same reasons as the additional elements of claim 1 (e.g., the “apparatus” of all of the dependent claims, the “wherein the first graphical interface includes icons, ones of the icons associated with respective ones of interaction rules, the interaction rules defining functions associated with graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: determine a third data request corresponds to a selection for a first icon of the icons when the third data request corresponds to a location of the first icon in the graphical interface data; and cause an adjustment of the second graphical interface by applying a second one of the interaction rules that is associated with the first icon” of claim 4. the “wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to generate the first graphical interface by” of claim 6, the “wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to” of claim 7, the “wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to generate the first graphical interface by” of claim 8, the “wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: map a third data request to a first one of interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; based on the third data request corresponding to a location of a legend request icon in the graphical interface data, ... in the first graphical interface” of claim 11, the “wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: map a request to a first one of interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and” of claim 12, the “wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: map a third data request to a first one of the interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and based on the third data request corresponding to a hover at a hover point, apply the one of the interaction rules with respect to the hover point by: ... associated with the hover point; and ... pop-up” of claim 13, the “first graphical interface including ... and one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: map a third data request to a first one of interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and based on the third data request corresponding to a table request, apply the first one of the interaction rules to generate a third graphical interface” of claim 14, the “wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to ... front-end prompt” of claim 45. and the “second graphical interface” of claim 49). Accordingly, claims 4-8, 11-14, 42-45, and 49 also are rejected as ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Regarding claims 15, 19, 20, 22, and 46-48, while the claims are of different scope relative to claims 1, 5, 6, 8, and 42-44, the claims recite limitations similar to the limitations of claims 1, 5, 6, 8, and 42-44. As such, the rejection rationales applied to reject claims 1, 5, 6, 8, and 42-44 also apply for purposes of rejecting claims 15, 19, 20, 22, and 46-48. Claims 15, 19, 20, 22, and 46-48 are, therefore, also rejected as ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-8, 11, 12, 15, 19, 20, 22, 42, 43, and 45-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2016/0071137 A1 to Sundaresan et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Sundaresan”), in view of U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2016/0359700 A1 to Pang et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Pang”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Sundaresan discloses the following limitations:
“An apparatus to generate an interactive graphical interface, the apparatus comprising: interface circuitry; machine readable instructions; and at least one processor circuit to be programmed by the machine readable instructions to at least: ...” - Sundaresan discloses, “FIGS. 10-12 depict example user interfaces for interactively presenting information to the user. Although FIGS. 10-12 depict specific example user interfaces and user interface elements, these are merely non-limiting examples; many other alternate user interfaces and user interface elements can be generated by the presentation module 210 and caused to be presented to the user. It will be noted that alternate presentations of the displays of FIGS. 10-12 can include additional information, graphics, options, and so forth. Alternatively, other presentations can include less information, or provide abridged information for easy use by the user” (para. [0075]), “a hardware module can be implemented mechanically, electronically, or any suitable combination thereof. For example, a hardware module can include dedicated circuitry or logic that is permanently configured to perform certain operations” and “a hardware module can include software executed by a general-purpose processor or other programmable processor” (para. [0082]), “FIG. 14 is a block diagram illustrating components of a machine 1400, according to some example embodiments, able to read instructions from a machine-readable medium (e.g., a machine-readable storage medium) and perform any one or more of the methodologies discussed herein” (para. [0098]), and “Communication can be implemented using a wide variety of technologies. The I/O components 1450 may include communication components 1464 operable to couple the machine 1400 to a network 1480 or devices 1470 via a coupling 1482 and a coupling 1472, respectively. For example, the communication components 1464 include a network interface component or other suitable device to interface with the network 1480” (para. [0104]). The machine generating the user interface, wherein the machine includes circuitry, machine instructions, the processor, and the software, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitations.
“... responsive to a first data request, execute a shift analysis model to generate shift analysis data; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Sundaresan also discloses, “At operation 410, the data module 230 accesses the trade data corresponding to the plurality of transactions. For example, the data module 230 may access the trade data from the publication system(s) 142, the payment system(s) 144 (e.g., e-commerce transaction histories), or elsewhere. The trade data includes data for respective transactions of the plurality of transaction such as transaction parties, transaction party geolocation, shipping origin, shipping destination, price, tax, regulatory compliance data, item description, payment method, payment currency, item category, item brand name, ratings and reviews of an item, and so on” (para. [0044]), and “At operation 420, the extraction module 240 extracts transaction attributes from the trade data” (para. [0046]). Responsive to machine instructions, the data module accessing trade data, and the extraction module extracting transaction attributes from the trade data, to obtain the trade data and transaction attributes, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... generate a multi-dimensional data structure including the shift analysis data corresponding to outputs of the shift analysis model; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Sundaresan also discloses, “one or more database server(s) 124 that facilitate access to one or more information storage repositories or database(s) 126” (para. [0028]), “the data module 230 may store various data, for example, in database(s) 126. For instance, the data module 230 may store results from various analyses, user preferences, and so forth. In further example embodiments, the data module 230 may maintain a database of trade data indexed or structured to allow for searching to identifying various trends” (para. [0036]), “the transaction attributes include, for example, countries associated with the transaction (e.g., origin country, destination country), shipping method, feedback associated with the transaction, item category (e.g., business & industrial, collectibles, electronics, fashion, home & garden, lifestyle, media), transaction value, item characteristics associated with the transaction (e.g., item was defective, item is a brand name or generic), transaction party characteristics (e.g., buyer is a frequent high spender, casual buyer, power seller), among many other transaction attributes. In a specific instance, the transaction attributes include basic parameters associated with a transaction, such as buyer, a country corresponding to the buyer (e.g., buyer's country of residence), seller, a country corresponding to the seller (e.g., seller's country of residence), shipping method, shipping origin, shipping destination, item, item description, value of transaction, and so forth” (para. [0047]). The indexed and structured databases of trade data, including the transaction attributes of the trade data, for storing the data retrieved, obtained, or extracted by the modules, in Sundaresan, read on the recited limitation. The indexed and structured data in the databases including a multitude of different attributes is indicative of there being “a multi-dimensional data structure,” as claimed.
“... generate a first graphical interface based on first data in the shift analysis data associated with the first data request, the first graphical interface including a multi-dimensional data visualization to represent shift trends among objects and entities in a consolidated view, the multi-dimensional data visualization including a chord chart having outer elements, ... and directed chords ..., the first graphical interface including: ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Sundaresan also discloses, “the visualization comprises a chord diagram showing a portion of the trade data or a portion of the plurality of transactions associated with an origin country (e.g., a country associated with a seller) and a destination country (e.g., country associate with a buyer)” and “In some embodiments, the chord diagram comprises chord lines that represents transactions between countries (e.g., a line from one country on the diagram to another country on the diagram representing transaction or trade activity). The trend module 260 may generate various transaction metrics summarizing trading activity between two particular countries. The presentation module 210 causes presentation or display of the transaction metrics generated by the trend module 260. For instance, the transaction metrics may include all, or some, transactions that occurred between two particular countries for a specified time period, a total value of the transactions that occurred between two particular countries for a specified time period, an average transaction value between two particular countries for a specified time period, and so on” (para. [0051]). Generating the chord diagram based on the trade data and extracted trade data from the data module and the extraction module, with the chord diagram including multiple different types of visual information, the visual information indicating transactions and trends of trading of products between regions, and the visual information being presented by chord diagrams having radially-outer arcs forming (mostly) a circle, and chord lines extending therebetween, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitations.
“... the outer elements representing different ones of the entities; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Sundaresan also discloses, “the generated visualization 1110 comprises a chord diagram representing cross-border trade between a particular country (e.g., the United Kingdom) and other countries or regions. In the chord diagram, each line may be representative of one or more transactions between two particular countries for a specified time period. A higher density of lines between two countries is indicative of a higher volume of trade between two countries” (para. [0077]). The radially-outer arcs of chord diagrams representing countries or regions, in Sundaresan, read on the recited limitation.
“... the directed chords ... with a first visual characteristic representing directions of respective shifts among the objects relative to the entities; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The visible features of the chord lines, indicative of transactions between countries, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... responsive to a second data request, query the multi-dimensional data structure to identify second data in the shift analysis data associated with the second data request without re-executing the shift analysis model; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Sundaresan also discloses, “the user navigates or otherwise explores the trade data via interacting with the visualization. In an example embodiment, the user selects various options, settings, and preferences to refine the appearance and content of the visualization” (para. [0053]), “FIG. 11 is a user interface diagram depicting an example user interface 1100 that includes a generated visualization 1110 of the trade data associated with a particular country or geographic region” (para. [0077]), and “FIG. 12 is a user interface diagram depicting an example user interface 1200 that includes a generated visualization 1210 of the trade data associated with multiple countries or geographic regions” (para. [0078]). Responsive to user selections, accessing the indexed and structured databases of trade data to focus on different subsets of the data, without redundantly performing the prior data module and extraction module operations, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation. An example of this would be going from the interface of FIG. 12 to the interface of FIG. 11, in Sundaresan, where elements appear only to be removed going from one interface to the other (or only added if going from the interface of FIG. 11 to FIG. 12).
“... cause an adjustment to the first graphical interface to generate a second graphical interface based on the second data in the shift analysis data; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Going from the interface of FIG. 11 to that of FIG. 12, or vice-versa, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... output the second graphical interface.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Displaying the interface of FIG. 11 (or that of FIG. 12) reads on the recited limitation.
The combination of Sundaresan and Pang (hereinafter referred to as “Sundaresan/Pang”) teaches limitations below of independent claim 1 that do not appear to be disclosed in their entirety by Sundaresan:
The claimed “chord chart” also including “inner elements nested within the outer elements, and directed chords connecting ones of the inner elements” - Pang discloses, “An example of a network chord diagram is shown in FIGS. 4A-4C. FIGS. 4A-4C all illustrate example visualizations of the same chord diagram 402. Example chord diagram 402 includes multiple chords (e.g. 428, 430, 432 and 434) and multiple endpoints (e.g. 404, 406, 408, 410, 412, 414, 416, 418, 420, 422, 424 and 426). As illustrated each chord, 428, 430, 432 and 434, all terminate or originate at endpoints 404, 416, 418, 422 and 424. Each cord represents a grouped portion of data flows that all originate from one endpoint and terminate at another endpoint. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4A, example chord diagram 402 includes chord 428 that originates/terminates at endpoint 404 and terminates/originates at chord 418” (para. [0076]), “At step 312, the dataflow monitoring system (e.g. analytics engine 120, collector 118, etc.) expands the grouped portion of data flows and corresponding endpoints. In some embodiments, selection of the chord causes the dataflow monitoring system to expand the grouped portion of data flows and/or either or both endpoints of the grouped portion of data flows. For example, selection of the chord causes analytics engine 120 to expand the represented grouped portion of data flows into sub-groupings of data flows. In another example, selection of the chord causes analytics engine 120 to expand one or both of the endpoints of the selected chord into sets of sub-endpoints. In another example, selection of the chord causes analytics engine 120 to expand the grouped portion of data flows into sub-groupings of data flows and one or both endpoints of the chords into sets of sub-endpoints” (para. [0078]), “As such, selection of an endpoint can cause analytics engine 120 to expand the represented endpoint into a more granular representation of the network topology. Furthermore, in some embodiments, selection of an endpoint also causes analytics engine 120 to expand the corresponding grouped portion of data flows (either originating from or terminating at the represented endpoint) into sub-groupings of data flows. For example, the selected endpoint represents a subnet” (para. [0079]), “FIG. 4B illustrates the updated display after the selection of endpoint 404. Expanded endpoint 404 results in sub-endpoint 436, 438, 440 and 442. Sub-endpoint 436, 438, 440 and 442 correspond with chords 428, 430, 432 and 434 respectively. In some embodiments, as illustrated in FIG. 4B, endpoint 404 represents a subnet and sub-endpoints 436, 438, 440 and 442 represent different clusters of hosts” (para. [0082]), and “following the previous example, FIG. 4C illustrates an example updated display of the interactive hierarchical network chord diagram drilled down to an even lower level of abstraction. Network chord diagram 402 of FIG. 4C illustrates the selection of sub-endpoint 438 results in the expansion of sub-endpoint 438 into sub-sub-endpoint 444, 446 and 448. In this example, the expansion of sub-endpoint 438 also expands chord 430 into a set of sub-chords 450, 452 and 454. Sub-chord 450, 452 and 454 originate or terminate at sub-endpoints 436, 438 and 440, respectively” (para. [0086]). Any of the radially-inner sub-elements depicted in the chord diagrams, in Pang, when applied in the context of the chord diagrams of Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... the inner elements representing ones of the objects associated with the different ones of the entities; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been referenced above. The radially-inner sub-elements of Pang being rendered to represent trade between the radially-outer regions, of Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
The claimed “directed chords” are “between ones of the inner elements” - See the aspects of Pang that have been referenced above. The chords extending between radially-inner sub-elements, of Pang, reads on the recited limitation.
Pang discloses “technology visualizes data flows within a datacenter in an interactive hierarchical network chord diagram” (Abstract), similar to the claimed invention and to Sundaresan. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the chord diagrams, of Sundaresan, to include the radially-inner sub-elements of the chord diagrams of Pang, to provide more granular representations of network topology, as taught by Pang (see para. [0079]).
Regarding claim 4, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first graphical interface includes icons, ones of the icons associated with respective ones of interaction rules, the interaction rules defining functions associated with graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Sundaresan also discloses, a “MASTER VIEW” and “TRANSACTIONS” drop-down menu; a “SHOW NAME” and “EXPORTS:” icon; “SHARE,” “FEEDBACK,” and “ALERTS” icons; and “SELECT OR CLEAR SITE ID,” “SELECT A SALE TYPE,” and “FM SEGMENT” drop-down menus (FIG. 11). The user interface diagram including the icons, drop-down menus, and the like, for receiving user selections, to facilitate navigating, exploring, and interacting with the visualizations, along with the software instructions for performing such functions with respect to the underlying indexed and structured data, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: determine a third data request corresponds to a selection for a first icon of the icons when the third data request corresponds to a location of the first icon in the graphical interface data; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The presentation module of the machine receiving user selections via the icons and drop-down menus shown in FIGS. 11 and 12, of Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... cause an adjustment of the second graphical interface by applying a second one of the interaction rules that is associated with the first icon.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The presentation module performing the refining of the appearances of visualizations, including the user interface diagrams, based on user selections, to facilitate navigation with, exploration of, and interaction with the visualizations, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation. Software instructions supporting functionality of interface elements, in Sundaresan, read on the recited “interaction rules” limitation.
Regarding claim 5, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein respective ones of the outer elements and the inner elements include a respective second visual characteristic representative of a corresponding one of the shift trends.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been mentioned above. Sundaresan also discloses, “The visualization may incorporate a variety of visual elements, such as color, graphs, text, and so on, to assist the user in interpreting the data represented by the visualization” (para. [0052]). The radially-outer elements of the chord diagrams of Sundaresan, and the radially-outer and radially-inner elements of the chord diagrams of Pang, when colored or otherwise visually highlighted to indicate transactions in the form of trading products, as in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation. The rationales for combining the teachings of the cited references, from the rejection of independent claim 1, also apply to this rejection of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 5, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to generate the first graphical interface by generating first ones of the inner elements with a first color, the first ones of the inner elements associated with a first one of the shift trends, the first one of the shift trends corresponding to growth; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been referenced above. The presentation module of the machine generating the user interface diagrams with radially-outer elements, in Sundaresan, along with radially-inner elements, in Pang, and assigning colors to such visual elements indicative of transactions including trading products, per Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation. Visual elements corresponding to chords of transactions, wherein said chords happen to correspond to more or fewer transactions in one time period versus another, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... generating second ones of the inner elements with a second color that is different than the first color, the second ones of the inner elements associated with a second one of the shift trends, the second one of the shift trends corresponds to decline.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been referenced above. Generating the user interface diagrams with radially-outer elements, in Sundaresan, along with radially-inner elements, in Pang, and assigning different colors to different ones of the visual elements, wherein the visual elements are indicative of transactions including trading products, per Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation. Visual elements corresponding to chords of transactions, wherein said chords happen to correspond to more or fewer transactions in one time period versus another, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
Regarding claim 7, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 6, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to generate third ones of the inner elements with a third color that is different than the first and second colors, the third color indicative of no shift.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been mentioned above. The presentation module of the machine generating the user interface diagrams, in Sundaresan, when including the radially-inner elements of the chord diagrams in Pang, wherein such elements have a wide arrange of colors, as in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation. The rationales for combining the teachings of the cited references, from the rejection of independent claim 1, also apply to this rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 5, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to generate the first graphical interface by: generating a first side of a first one of the directed chords with a first one of the inner elements based on the shift analysis data, the first side including a first color indicative of growth; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been referenced above. The presentation module of the machine generating user interfaces and visualizations based on software, wherein the visualizations include chord diagrams in which chords have ends, and the chord ends meet radially-inner elements as in the chord diagrams of Pang, and wherein the chords are colored and are indicative of trends in trade and transaction data, including increased trade and transactions in certain time periods, as in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... generating a second side of the first one of the directed chords with a second one of the inner elements based on the shift analysis data, the second side including a second color indicative of decline, ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been mentioned above. The visualizations including chord diagrams in which chords have ends, in Sundaresan, wherein the chord ends meet radially-inner elements as in the chord diagrams of Pang, and wherein the chords are colored and are indicative of trends in trade and transaction data, including decreased trade and transactions in certain time periods, as in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... the first one of the directed chords being indicative of a shift from the second one of the inner elements to the first one of the inner elements.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been mentioned above. The chords in the chord diagrams indicating that trade and transactions have decreased in some instances (e.g., thinner chords), and increased in other instances (e.g., thicker chords), in Sundaresan, when the chords terminate at different radially-inner elements, per Pang, reads on the recited limitation. The rationales for combining the teachings of the cited references, from the rejection of claim 1, also apply to this rejection of claim 8.
Regarding claim 11, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: map a third data request to a first one of interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The presentation module of the machine using further user selections to define further user interface diagrams, dictated by the software instructions for such functionality, as performed on the indexed and structured data, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... based on the third data request corresponding to a location of a legend request icon in the graphical interface data, ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The user selections made in connection with the visual elements adjacent upper and left portions of the chord diagrams of the user interface diagrams, of Sundaresan, read on the recited limitation.
“... generate a legend based on a first portion of the shift analysis data that corresponds to a first one of the objects; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been cited above. Generating (or preparing) the visual elements adjacent upper and left portions of the chord diagrams of the user interface diagrams, of Sundaresan, read on the recited limitation.
“... present the legend in the first graphical interface.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been cited above. Displaying the visual elements adjacent upper and left portions of the chord diagrams of the user interface diagrams, of Sundaresan, read on the recited limitation.
Regarding claim 12, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: map a request to a first one of interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The presentation module of the machine using further user selections to define further user interface diagrams, dictated by the software instructions for such functionality, as performed on the indexed and structured data, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... based on the third data request corresponding to a pin request for a first one of the inner elements, cause exaggeration of the first one of the inner elements, a first one of the directed chords extending from the first one of the inner elements, and a second one of the inner elements to which the first one of the directed chords extends.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been cited above. The user selections causing specified chord diagram elements to be displayed, wherein hovering causes specific country and import/export data therebetween to be shown, in Sundaresan, when modified to include radially-inner elements like those of Pang, reads on the recited limitation. Showing summary data of the visual element that is hovered over is a form of “exaggeration,” at least due to the combination of the visual elements and the summary data being more noticeable than the visual element alone.
Regarding claims 15, 19, 20, and 22, while the claims are of different scope relative to claims 1, 5, 6, and 8, the claims recite limitations similar to those recited by claims 1, 5, 6, and 8. As such, the rationales applied to reject claims 1, 5, 6, and 8 also apply for purposes of rejecting claims 15, 19, 20, and 22. Claims 15, 19, 20, and 22 are, therefore, also rejected under 35 USC 103 as obvious in view of Sundaresan/Pang.
Regarding claim 42, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the chord chart includes: a first one of the outer elements representing a first entity of the entities; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The chord diagram having a radially-outer arc associated with a region, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... a second one of the outer elements representing a second entity of the entities; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The chord diagram having another radially-outer arc associated with another region, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation
“... a first one of the inner elements representing a first object of the objects; ...” - See the aspects of Pang that have been referenced above. The chord diagram having a radially-inner arc associated with trade transactions, per Sundaresan and Pang, reads on the recited limitation.
“... a second one of the inner elements representing a second object of the objects, the first and second ones of the inner elements nested within the first one of the outer elements; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been referenced above. The chord diagram having another radially-inner arc associated with trade transactions, per Sundaresan and Pang, wherein two radially-inner arcs within a single radially-outer arc, as in Pang, reads on the recited limitation.
“... a third one of the inner elements representing the first object; and ...” - See the aspects of Pang that have been referenced above. Another of the radially-inner arcs, in Pang, reads on the recited limitation.
“... a fourth one of the inner elements representing the second object, the third and fourth one of the inner elements nested within the second one of the outer elements.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan and Pang that have been cited above. Other radially-inner arcs, within another single radially-outer arc, in Pang, reads on the recited limitation. The rationales for combining the teachings of the cited references, from the rejection of independent claim 1, also apply to this rejection of claim 42.
Regarding claim 43, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 42, wherein the chord chart includes one or more of (a) a first one of the directed chords extending between the first one of the inner elements and the second one of the inner elements to represent a respective shift between the first object and the second object within the first entity, (b) a second one of the directed chords extending between the first one of the inner elements and the third one of the inner elements to represent a respective shift between the first object relative to the first entity and the first object relative to the second entity, and (c) a third one of the directed chords extending between the first one of the inner elements and the fourth one of the inner elements to represent a respective shift between the first object relative to the first entity and the second object relative to the second entity.” - See the aspects Sundaresan, Pang, and Trick that have been cited above. The chord diagrams having chords between radially-inner arcs, indicative of metrics associated with the arcs, in Pang and Trick, read on the recited limitation.
Regarding claim 45, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to generate specifications data structures based on front-end prompt selections, the specifications data structures defining associations between the multi-dimensional data visualization and the multi-dimensional data structure.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The processor providing filters, based on user selections and preferences, wherein the filters define associations between the visualization interfaces and the indexed and structured data, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
Regarding claims 46 and 47, while the claims are of different scope relative to claims 42 and 43, the claims recite limitations similar to those recited by claims 42 and 43. As such, the rationales applied to reject claims 42 and 43 also apply for purposes of rejecting claims 46 and 47. Claims 46 and 47 are, therefore, also rejected under 35 USC 103 as obvious in view Sundaresan/Pang.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaresan, in view of Pang, and further in view of WIPO Int’l Pub. No. 2022/162465 A1 to Bothwell et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Bothwell”).
Regarding claim 13, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: map a third data request to a first one of the interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The presentation module of the machine using further user selections to define further user interface diagrams, dictated by the software instructions for such functionality, as performed on the indexed and structured data, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... based on the third data request corresponding to a hover at a hover point, apply the one of the interaction rules with respect to the hover point by: ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Sundaresan also discloses, “In the chord diagram, each line may be representative of one or more transactions between two particular countries for a specified time period. A higher density of lines between two countries is indicative of a higher volume of trade between two countries. In an example embodiments, the user interacts with the chord diagram by hovering over a country to show import/export summary data within a specified time period” (para. [0077]). Users interacting with the chord diagrams by hovering over countries, leading the programming of the presentation module to modify the visualizations, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... retrieving, from the multi-dimensional data structure, third date of the shift analysis data corresponding to a first one of the respective shifts associated with the hover point; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. Retrieving, from the indexed and structured data, information about transactions for regions, associated with the hovering, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
The combination of Sundaresan, Pang, and Bothwell (hereinafter referred to as “Sundaresan/Pang/Bothwell”) teaches limitations below of claim 13 that do not appear to be taught in their entirety by Sundaresan/Pang:
“... generating a pop-up visual that identifies the first one of the respective shifts.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been cited above. Sundaresan also discloses, “the presentation module 210 can cause presentation of various alerts, notifications, or other user interfaces that provide the user with information associated with analyzes associated with the trade data. In various example embodiments, the presentation module 210 presents or causes presentation or display of information (e.g., visually displaying information on a screen, acoustic output, haptic feedback). Interactively presenting information is intended to include the exchange of information between a particular device and the user. The user may provide input to interact with the user interface in many possible manners such as alphanumeric, point based (e.g., cursor), tactile, or other input (e.g., touch screen, tactile sensor, light sensor, infrared sensor, biometric sensor, microphone, gyroscope, accelerometer, or other sensors), and the like” (para. [0034]), and “the user interface 1200 includes options for the user to modify or alter the presentation of the trade data. In an example embodiment, options, preferences, and settings are overlaid or included on the chord diagram” (para. [0079]). Presenting information following hovering, wherein the presentation involves displaying selected information options as additional interfaces overlaid on the chord diagram, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited “generating a ... visual that identifies the first one of the respective shifts” limitation. Bothwell discloses, “An administrator can hover over a chord to see detailed traffic information for the node pair (see e.g. Figure 50a), or the administrator can hover over a chord line to see detailed traffic information for the node pair (see e.g. Figure 50b)” (para. [0192]), and shows pop-up windows in FIGS. 50A and 50B. The pop-up windows, in Bothwell, read on the recited “pop-up” limitation.
Bothwell discloses “temporal monitoring and visualization” (Abstract) using a “chord diagram” (para. [0088]), similar to the claimed invention and to the combination of Sundaresan/Pang. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the chord diagram, hovering, and import/export summary data, of the combination of Sundaresan/Pang, to include pop-ups, like those in Bothwell, for displaying more detailed information easily, as taught by Bothwell.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaresan, in view of Pang, and further in view of U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2016/0085827 A1 to Chadha et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Chadha”), and further in view of CA Pat. App. Pub. No. 2 814 966 A1 to Arksey et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Arksey”).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Sundaresan, Pang, and Chadha (hereinafter referred to as “Sundaresan/Pang/Chadha”) teaches limitations below of claim 14 that do not appear to be taught in their entirety by Sundaresan/Pang:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the multi-dimensional data visualization is a first data visualization, the first graphical interface including a second multi-dimension data visualization presented as a bubble chart, the bubble chart including bubbles to represent combinations of the objects and the entities relative to respective net shifting values and incrementality values, and one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The bar graphs shown in FIGS. 11 and 12 of Sundaresan, including metrics about trade, as part of the operation of the presentation module of the machine, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited “wherein the multi-dimensional data visualization is a first data visualization, the first graphical interface including a second multi-dimension data visualization presented as a ... chart, the ... chart including ... combinations of the objects and the entities relative to respective net shifting values and incrementality values, and one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to” limitation. Chadha discloses, “FIG. 3 illustrates examples of data visualization according to aspects of the present disclosure. In one configuration, the data visualization is a sentiment heat map 308” (para. [0057]), “In another configuration, the data visualization is a bar graph 302 for the sentiment over time” (para. [0058]), and “The data visualization is not limited to the schemes shown in FIG. 3, the data may be visualized via any desired scheme, such as, but not limited to Calendars, Box Plots, Bubble Charts and variations thereof, Bullet Charts, Chord Diagrams” (para. [0059]). The visualization including chord diagrams and bubble charts, in Chadha, when applied to the chord diagram of the user interface diagram of Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
“... map a third data request to a first one of interaction rules based on graphical interface data, the interaction rules defining functions associated with the graphical interface data relative to the multi-dimensional data structure; and ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The presentation module of the machine using further user selections to define further user interface diagrams, dictated by the software instructions for such functionality, as performed on the indexed and structured data, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
Chadha discloses a “method of analyzing data” (Abstract), similar to the claimed invention and to the combination of Sundaresan/Pang. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the chord diagram, of Sundaresan/Pang, to be presented in combination with a bubble chart, as in Chadha, as such “visualization options are configurable by the user and may vary based on the deployment domain and goal of the data mining system,” as taught by Chadha (para. [0059]).
The combination of Sundaresan, Pang, Chadha, and Arksey (hereinafter referred to as “Sundaresan/Pang/Chadha/Arksey”) teaches limitations below of claim 14 that do not appear to be taught in their entirety by Sundaresan/Pang/Chadha:
“... based on the third data request corresponding to a table request, apply the first one of the interaction rules to generate a third graphical interface by generating the second multi-dimensional data visualization as a sortable table, the sortable table to include first shift analysis data that is plotted in the bubble chart.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been mentioned above. Arksey discloses, “FIG. 4 is a screen capture illustrating an exemplary categorized bubble chart presentation with one category and one free axis (vertical)” (para. [0019]), and “FIG. 10 is a screen capture illustrating an initial overview presentation 1000 of a graphical user interface ("GUI") 380 for a data processing system 300 in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. The GUI 380 and its presentations (e.g., 1000) may be displayed, for example, on the display 340 of the data processing system 300. The initial overview presentation 1000 includes a grid 1010 composed of grid lines 1011 and containing circles or bubbles 1020 in cells 1030 that represent the current value of a statistic (e.g., 1041) for a given transaction (e.g., 1083)” (para. [0051]). The bubble chart showing bubbles and values with respect to two distinct axes, in Arksey, when applied to the data showing values and trends associated with trade transactions among regions, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
Arksey discloses, “method for presenting detailed information for an item within overview information on a display screen” (Abstract), similar to the claimed invention and to the combination of Sundaresan/Pang/Chadha. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the bubble chart of the combination of Sundaresan/Pang/Chadha, to include the grid and bubbles of Arksey, to visually show relationships between current values of statistics for given transactions (such as the transaction of Sundaresan), as taught by Arksey (see para. [0051]).
Claims 44 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaresan, in view of Pang, and further in view of U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 2016/0232537 A1 to Nonez et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Nonez”).
Regarding claim 44, the combination of Sundaresan, Pang, and Nonez (hereinafter referred to as “Sundaresan/Pang/Nonez”) teaches limitations below that do not appear to be taught in their entirety by Sundaresan/Pang:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the multi-dimensional data structure includes a data cube.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The indexed and structured data, in Sundaresan, does not appear to be described as being or forming a cube. Nonez discloses, “Many enterprise performance management and business planning applications require a large base of users to enter data that the software then accumulates into higher level areas of responsibility in the organization. Moreover, once data has been entered, it must be retrieved to be utilized. The system may perform mathematical calculations on the data, combining data submitted by many users. Using the results of these calculations, the system may generate reports for review by higher management. Often these complex systems make use of multidimensional data sources that organize and manipulate the tremendous volume of data using data structures referred to as data cubes. Each data cube, for example, includes a plurality of hierarchical dimensions having levels and members for storing the multidimensional data” (para. [0003]), and “The data sources 38 may include two-dimensional databases and/or multidimensional databases or data cubes. The data sources may be implemented using a variety of vendor platforms, and may be distributed throughout the enterprise. As one example, the data sources 38 may be multidimensional databases configured for Online Analytical Processing (OLAP)” (para. [0030]). Use of the data cubes or OLAP arrangements, in Nonez, reads on their recited limitation.
Nonez discloses “Systems and methods for cross-border trend alerts and visualizations” (Abstract), similar to the claimed invention and to Sundaresan/Pang. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the indexing and structuring of data, of Sundaresan/Pang, to includes using data cube or OLAP arrangements, as in Nonez, as they can be used to organize and manipulate tremendous volumes of data, per Nonez (see para. [0003]).
Regarding claim 48, while the claim is of different scope relative to claim 44, the claim recites limitations similar to those recited by claim 44. As such, the rationales applied to reject claim 44 also apply for purposes of rejecting claim 48. Claim 48 is, therefore, also rejected under 35 USC 103 as obvious in view of Sundaresan/Pang/Nonez.
Claim 49 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaresan, in view of Pang, and further in view of Trick, Andrew. “Foreign Trade Flows (Chord Diagram).” The Wayback Machine, 02 June 2018. (last accessed on 21 August 2025 via https://web.archive.org/web/20220624215329/http://andrewtrick.com/trade_flows.html) (hereinafter referred to as “Trick”).
Regarding claim 49, Sundaresan/Pang teaches the following limitations:
“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the multi-dimensional data visualization is rendered as a pivoted chord chart in the second graphical interface, the pivoted chord chart including: ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The user interface in FIG. 12 of Sundaresan reads on the recited limitation.
The combination of Sundaresan, Pang, and Trick (hereinafter referred to as “Sundaresan/Pang/Trick”) teaches limitations below of claim 49 that do not appear to be taught in their entirety by Sundaresan/Pang:
“... the outer elements representing different ones of the objects; ...” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been referenced above. The radially-outer arcs of chord diagrams, in Sundaresan, read on the recited “the outer elements representing different ones” limitation. Trick discloses a chord diagram of “Foreign Trade Flows” in which radially-outer arcs or elements are associated with “exports” and “Imports” (p. 1). The outer arcs, of Trick, read on the recited “of the objects” limitation.
“... the inner elements representing ones of the entities associated with the different ones of the objects; and ...” - See the aspects of Pang that have been referenced above. The radially-inner arcs of chord diagrams, in Pang, read on the recited “the inner elements” limitation. The chord diagram in which radially-inner arcs or elements are associated with “EU,” “Canada,” and the like, in Trick, read on the recited “representing ones of the entities associated with the different ones of the objects” limitation.
“... the directed chords between ones of the inner elements with the first visual characteristic to represent directions of respective shifts among the entities relative to the objects.” - See the aspects of Sundaresan that have been mentioned above. The visible features of the chord lines, indicative of transactions between countries, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited limitation.
Trick discloses “Trade Flows” represented by “a chord diagram” (p. 1), similar to the claimed invention and to Sundaresan/Pang. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the chord diagrams, of Sundaresan/Pang, to have inner and outer elements arranged, as in Trick, to provide additional information about trade and related financial metrics, as taught by Trick (see p. 1).
Response to Arguments
On pp. 16-22 of the Response, the applicant requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the claim rejection under 35 USC 101. In support of the request, the applicant reiterates text from Ex parte Desjardins. (Response, pp. 16 and 17.) The applicant also cites Enfish. (Response, p. 17.) The applicant contends that reasons for eligibility from Desjardins and Enfish indicate that the claims in the present application also should be deemed eligible, especially in light of the applicant’s recited “without re-executing the shift analysis model” limitation, and the specification explaining that interactive shift analysis circuitry can query data instead of querying database engine circuitry to compute shift analysis data from scratch each time. (Response, pp. 17 and 18.) The applicant contends that holding that the claims are ineligible involves performing the analysis at an impermissibly high level of granularity, contrary to Desjardins. The applicant also contends that the claim language does not mention commercial interactions, sales activities, monitoring metrics relating to markets, or managing personal behavior or relationships between people. (Response, p. 18.) The applicant also contends that the positions taken by the Office Action seek to improperly expand the group of organizing human activity beyond permissible bounds per the Courts and the Office’s 2024 Guidance Update. (Response, p. 19.) According to the applicant, no commercial interactions or managing personal behavior are recited in the applicant’s claims, as evidenced by at least the recited “to execute a shift analysis model,” “generate a multi-dimensional data structure,” “query the multi-dimensional data structure,” and “without re-executing the shift analysis model” limitations. (Response, pp. 19 and 20.) The applicant also contends that such limitations indicate that the claims do not recite mental processes. (Response, p. 20.) The applicant also contends that the claims achieve a technical improvement by generating a multi-dimensional data structure avoiding re-execution of the shift analysis model. (Response, p. 21.)
The examiner finds the arguments above unpersuasive. The applicant’s contentions about reasoning from Desjardins and Enfish being applicable to applicant’s claims are unpersuasive because the claims at issue in Desjardins and Enfish involve technologies that have virtually no relationship to the technology in the applicant’s claims. Desjardins involves a claim directed to improving training of machine learning models. The examiner asserts that Desjardins has little to no applicability outside of that narrow context. The applicant’s claims do not establish improving the training of machine learning models. The examiner also asserts that the claims in Enfish involve improving a data store and retrieval system (an actual computer hardware component), via improving its operation. The applicants claims, on the other hand, appear to involve generating an interactive graphical interface using generic, conventional computer componentry, where any improvement is actually to the content displayed by said graphical interface, not operation of the graphical interface itself. As such, parallels cannot be drawn between Enfish and the applicant’s invention. Also, executing a shift analysis model, and taking other actions without re-executing the shift analysis model, as claimed by the applicant, are abstract idea elements (analyzed in Step 2A, Prong One) not additional elements analyzed in Step 2A, Prong Two are an improvement to computers, technology, or a technical field. A shift analysis model can be a mental model. Perhaps a flow diagram, or a sketched algorithmic process. Executing such a model (or not) involves nothing more than mental processing. As for the enumerated groupings of abstract ideas, aside from conventional, generic computer componentry, the applicant’s claims are directed to shift analysis. That shift analysis is something performed by businesses, perhaps by sales analysts or the like. The applicant’s specification makes clear that shift analysis has to do with market research by business entities (para. [0001]). To view shift analysis as not applying in this context would require ignoring the specification. Claims should be interpreted in light of the specification, not in a vacuum, per MPEP 2111. Further, “to execute a shift analysis model,” “generate a multi-dimensional data structure,” “query the multi-dimensional data structure,” and “without re-executing the shift analysis model” can involve thinking through a mental model, generating a mental or written table, looking something up in the table, and doing that without thinking through the mental model again. These are mental processes. For all of these reasons, the claim rejection under 35 USC 101 is maintained.
On pp. 22-24 of the Response, the applicant requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the claim rejections under 35 USC 103. The applicant contends the Sundaresan and Pang, alone or in combination, fail(s) to teach or suggest the recited “at least one processor circuit to be programmed by the machine readable instructions to at least: responsive to a first data request, execute a shift analysis model to generate shift analysis data; generate a multi-dimensional data structure including the shift analysis data corresponding to outputs of the shift analysis model” limitation, or the like, from the applicant’s claims. The examiner finds the contentions unpersuasive. While the examiner acknowledges that the passages of Sundaresan and Pang alone may not be sufficient to read on the recited limitations, there are other elements, and interpretations thereof, in Sundaresan and Pang, that do read on the recited limitations. For example, Sundaresan discloses, “FIGS. 10-12 depict example user interfaces for interactively presenting information to the user. Although FIGS. 10-12 depict specific example user interfaces and user interface elements, these are merely non-limiting examples; many other alternate user interfaces and user interface elements can be generated by the presentation module 210 and caused to be presented to the user. It will be noted that alternate presentations of the displays of FIGS. 10-12 can include additional information, graphics, options, and so forth. Alternatively, other presentations can include less information, or provide abridged information for easy use by the user” (para. [0075]), “a hardware module can be implemented mechanically, electronically, or any suitable combination thereof. For example, a hardware module can include dedicated circuitry or logic that is permanently configured to perform certain operations” and “a hardware module can include software executed by a general-purpose processor or other programmable processor” (para. [0082]), “FIG. 14 is a block diagram illustrating components of a machine 1400, according to some example embodiments, able to read instructions from a machine-readable medium (e.g., a machine-readable storage medium) and perform any one or more of the methodologies discussed herein” (para. [0098]), and “Communication can be implemented using a wide variety of technologies. The I/O components 1450 may include communication components 1464 operable to couple the machine 1400 to a network 1480 or devices 1470 via a coupling 1482 and a coupling 1472, respectively. For example, the communication components 1464 include a network interface component or other suitable device to interface with the network 1480” (para. [0104]). The machine generating the user interface, wherein the machine includes circuitry, machine instructions, the processor, and the software, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited “apparatus to generate an interactive graphical interface, the apparatus comprising: interface circuitry; machine readable instructions; and at least one processor circuit to be programmed by the machine readable instructions to at least” limitation. Sundaresan also discloses, “At operation 410, the data module 230 accesses the trade data corresponding to the plurality of transactions. For example, the data module 230 may access the trade data from the publication system(s) 142, the payment system(s) 144 (e.g., e-commerce transaction histories), or elsewhere. The trade data includes data for respective transactions of the plurality of transaction such as transaction parties, transaction party geolocation, shipping origin, shipping destination, price, tax, regulatory compliance data, item description, payment method, payment currency, item category, item brand name, ratings and reviews of an item, and so on” (para. [0044]), and “At operation 420, the extraction module 240 extracts transaction attributes from the trade data” (para. [0046]). Responsive to machine instructions, the data module accessing trade data, and the extraction module extracting transaction attributes from the trade data, to obtain the trade data and transaction attributes, in Sundaresan, reads on the recited “responsive to a first data request, execute a shift analysis model to generate shift analysis data” limitation. Sundaresan also discloses, “one or more database server(s) 124 that facilitate access to one or more information storage repositories or database(s) 126” (para. [0028]), “the data module 230 may store various data, for example, in database(s) 126. For instance, the data module 230 may store results from various analyses, user preferences, and so forth. In further example embodiments, the data module 230 may maintain a database of trade data indexed or structured to allow for searching to identifying various trends” (para. [0036]), “the transaction attributes include, for example, countries associated with the transaction (e.g., origin country, destination country), shipping method, feedback associated with the transaction, item category (e.g., business & industrial, collectibles, electronics, fashion, home & garden, lifestyle, media), transaction value, item characteristics associated with the transaction (e.g., item was defective, item is a brand name or generic), transaction party characteristics (e.g., buyer is a frequent high spender, casual buyer, power seller), among many other transaction attributes. In a specific instance, the transaction attributes include basic parameters associated with a transaction, such as buyer, a country corresponding to the buyer (e.g., buyer's country of residence), seller, a country corresponding to the seller (e.g., seller's country of residence), shipping method, shipping origin, shipping destination, item, item description, value of transaction, and so forth” (para. [0047]). The indexed and structured databases of trade data, including the transaction attributes of the trade data, for storing the data retrieved, obtained, or extracted by the modules, in Sundaresan, read on the recited “generate a multi-dimensional data structure including the shift analysis data corresponding to outputs of the shift analysis model” limitation. The indexed and structured data in the databases including a multitude of different attributes is indicative of there being “a multi-dimensional data structure,” as claimed.
Conclusion
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 THOMAS Y. HO, whose telephone number is (571)270-7918. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9:30 AM to 5:30 PM Eastern.
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 at 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.
/THOMAS YIH HO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624