DETAILED ACTION
This is a Final Office Action in response to claims on 08/28/2025. Claims 1-10 are pending. The effective filling date is 08/19/2020.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/17/2023 and 09/26/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1- Claims 1-10 are directed to a method, which are patent eligible subject matter and pass step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1-The independent claim 1 recites:
A method of a management server (additional element) for managing biometric information based on location information (management of information is a process of collecting information, which is a mental process because it can practically be performed in the human mind, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)), the method comprising:
determining whether a user is currently located in a restaurant (making a determination is an act of analyzing data, and is a mental process that can be performed in the human mind, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
when it is determined that the user is currently located in the restaurant, providing a menu list sold by the restaurant to the user (providing a list of items sold in a restaurant is a commercial interaction, as it is a list of things being sold, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(B) i. structuring a sales force or marketing company, which pertains to marketing or sales activities or behaviors, In re Ferguson, 558 F.3d 1359, 1364, 90 USPQ2d 1035, 1038 (Fed. Cir. 2009); it can also be aa way of displaying information, which is a mental process under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A));
determining whether current location information of the user is changed to be different from location information of the restaurant based on location information of the user (making a determination is an act of analyzing data, and is a mental process that can be performed in the human mind, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
when the current location information of the user is changed, generating a meal amount inquiry message for inquiring about a meal amount of the food menu selected by the user (generating a message is a step of displaying the results of a decision, and is a mental process that can be performed in the human mind, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A) a claim to "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
determining a type of food and calorie eaten by the user based on a food menu eaten by the user in the menu list (providing a list of items sold in a restaurant is a commercial interaction, as it is a list of things being sold, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(B) i. structuring a sales force or marketing company, which pertains to marketing or sales activities or behaviors, In re Ferguson, 558 F.3d 1359, 1364, 90 USPQ2d 1035, 1038 (Fed. Cir. 2009); it can also be aa way of displaying information, which is a mental process under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A)); and
providing the user with biometric information of the user which is changed according to the type of food and the calorie eaten by the user (providing information to a user is a mental process because it is the exchange of information that can be performed in the human mind, see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(A)).
Step 2A, Prong 2-The additional elements are a management server, biometric information and menu list. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the determination is not claimed in the positive for how this biometric information Is obtained, and therefore, it is in the abstract. Claiming what information is being analyzed and what information the biometrics is compared to, is just information, and does not improve technology or showcase ow it would be more than the idea of management of information. See MPEP 2106.05(g), where when the additional elements are just information, and data gathering does not provide more than the abstract idea and has been found to be insignificant extra-solution activity. Examples under MPEP 2106.05(g) not found to provide significantly more include: iv. Obtaining information about transactions using the Internet to verify credit card transactions, CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011); v. Consulting and updating an activity log, Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 715, 112 USPQ2d at 1754; and vi. Determining the level of a biomarker in blood, Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968. See also PerkinElmer, Inc. v. Intema Ltd., 496 Fed. App'x 65, 73, 105 USPQ2d 1960, 1966 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (assessing or measuring data derived from an ultrasound scan, to be used in a diagnosis)).
Step 2B-The independent claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements are description of information gathered, and is not more than the abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(g).
Dependent Claims
Claims 2- is another determination step, which is a mental process since it is obtaining information. It provides a user terminal, which is an element used to gather information, and continues to be the tool to obtain information, and is nothing more, under MPEP 2106.05(f).
Claim 3, 5-10- includes determination steps, receiving, searching and providing information, which are all steps that can be performed in the human mind, as there are no tools claimed to complete these steps, and therefore is an abstract idea under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III). The claims fail to add any additional elements to be more than the abstract idea, and the details about what is being search, and the information analyzed is insignificant extra solution activity, see MPEP 2106.05(g).
Claim 4 continues to be determination steps, which is a mental process since it continues to be analyzing information. The claim adds an inquiry message, which is not more than a tool to obtain the information, and therefore does not provide more than the idea of management of information, under MPEP 2106.05(f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0290172 A1 Hadad et al. (hereinafter Hadad) in view of US 10,032,144 B1 Jacob et al. (hereinafter Jacob).
Regarding claim 1, Hadad teaches a method of a management server for managing biometric information based on location information (Hadad Abstract, dietary glucose monitor), the method comprising:
determining whether a user is currently located in a restaurant (Hadad [0241] user device to determine geolocation, and restaurants in the vicinity);
when it is determined that the user is currently located in the restaurant, providing a menu list sold by the restaurant to the user (Hadad [0241] the list of menu items at the restaurant);
when the current location information of the user is changed, generating a meal amount inquiry message for inquiring about a meal amount of the food menu selected by the user (Hadad [0239] the user device may send information to the user with suggestions; [0241] make a suggestions for menu of nearby restaurants, nearby restaurant are determined based on the user location);
determining a type of food and calorie eaten by the user based on a food menu eaten by the user in the menu list (Hadad [0236-237] the device can have a hub for user to record food consumed at the restaurant); and
providing the user with biometric information of the user which is changed according to the type of food and the calorie eaten by the user (Hadad [0237] the user inputs the food consumed, with the timestamps, and the monitor then records possible blood spikes related to the consumption of specific foods).
Hadad fails to explicitly disclose determining whether current location information of the user is changed to be different from location information of the restaurant based on location information of the user.
Jacob is in the field of tracking users (Jacob Abstract, tracking a user in a restaurant) and teaches determining whether current location information of the user is changed to be different from location information of the restaurant based on location information of the user (Jacob Col. 13, Lns. 62-Col. 14, Lns 1-10, it can be determined to initiate automatic check swiping based on a trigger event, that trigger event may be the user departing the restaurant location). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the post-meal biometric tracking of Hadad with the location determination taught by Jacob. The motivation for doing so would be to eliminate the need for a user to input the end time, and automatically process the end of the event (Jacob Col.4, Lns. 27-35, a user may select location services be turned on to determine when a user arrives and departs the location of the restaurant to trigger a user device action).
Regarding claim 2, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 1, wherein the determining of whether the user is currently located in the restaurant comprises determining whether the user is currently located in the restaurant based on restaurant information input through the user terminal (Hadad [0241] user device to determine geolocation, and restaurants in the vicinity; [0196] the user may take pictures of the menu at a restaurant, and therefore the bounding boxes can determine the restaurant and specific menu items).
Regarding claim 3, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 1, wherein the determining of whether the user is currently located in the restaurant comprises:
determining location information of a position where the user is located (Hadad [0241] user device to determine geolocation, and restaurants in the vicinity);
searching for restaurant information mapped to the location information, and providing the searched restaurant information to the user (Hadad [0241] the list of menu items at the restaurant based on location); and
when a specific restaurant is selected among searched restaurants, determining that the user is currently located at the selected restaurant (Hadad [0273] the user device can determine the time and geolocation of the user, and the software’s can ask and confirm by the user that the information is correct).
Regarding claim 6, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 2, wherein the determining of the type of food and the calorie eaten by the user comprises:
searching for a menu list sold by a restaurant where the user is located (Hadad [0241] the list of menu items at the restaurant based on location);
providing the searched menu list to the user, and determining a food menu selected by the user in the menu list as a food menu eaten by the user (Hadad [0236-237] the device can have a hub for user to record food consumed at the restaurant); and
determining the type of food and the calorie eaten by the user by searching a food type identifier and calorie information related to the food menu eaten by the user (Hadad [0307-308] the food ontology system can take images of food at restaurants, or menu items, and determine the ingredients in the menu item, and then deduce the calorie information for the food items).
Regarding claim 7, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 6, wherein the food type identifier and the calorie information related to the food menu eaten by the user are provided from a restaurant providing the food menu and are stored in a database (Hadad [0118] restaurants may upload calorie information about specific menu items, and stored on different databases to input the specific menu item when the user selects a specific menu item at a restaurant).
Regarding claim 8, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 2, wherein biometric information of the user which is changed according to the type of food and the calorie eaten by the user at a time of finishing dining is determined (Hadad [0277] the time frame includes specific times for post meal tracking, within a 2 or 3 hour period to biometric track). Hadad fails to explicitly disclose further comprising: when the current location information of the user is changed, determining that the user finishes dining.
Jacob is in the field of tracking users (Jacob Abstract, tracking a user in a restaurant) and teaches when the current location information of the user is changed, determining that the user finishes dining (Jacob Col. 14, Lns. 63-67, gps location of the user determines that the user is at the restaurant). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the post-meal biometric tracking of Hadad with the location determination taught by Jacob. The motivation for doing so would be to eliminate the need for a user to input the end time, and automatically process the end of the event (Jacob Col.4, Lns. 27-35, a user may select location services be turned on to determine when a user arrives and departs the location of the restaurant to trigger a user device action).
Regarding claim 9, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a food menu identifier for which the user wants to search (Hadad [0166] the user device may include a filter for specific type of food using text);
searching for a restaurant selling food corresponding to the food menu identifier among restaurants close to a current location of the user (Hadad [0241] user device to determine geolocation, and restaurants in the vicinity); and
providing information on the searched restaurant to the user (Hadad [0241] the list of menu items at the restaurant based on location).
Regarding claim 10, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 9, further comprising:
receiving a target calorie range together with the food menu identifier for which the user wants to search (Hadad [0106] diabetics need a specific calorie intake, and specific percentages of types of food; [0187] the food analysis tool can determine calories per serving; [0241] searching nearby restaurants and recommending different menu items based on the personal user dietary restrictions),
searching for one or more restaurants located close to the current location of the user among restaurants which sell food satisfying the target calorie range and corresponding to the food menu identifier (Hadad [0241] user device to determine geolocation, and restaurants in the vicinity; [0166] the user device may include a filter for specific type of food using text), and
providing the searched one or more restaurants to the user (Hadad [0241] the list of menu items at the restaurant based on location).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadad, Jacob and in view of US 2012/0303638 A1 Bousamra et al. (hereinafter Bousamra).
Regarding claim 4, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 1, wherein the determining of whether the user is currently located in the restaurant comprises:
determining location information of a position where the user is located (Hadad [0241] user device to determine geolocation, and restaurants in the vicinity);
determining whether a restaurant mapped to the location information exists (Hadad [0241] the list of menu items at the restaurant based on location);
when the restaurant mapped to the location information exists, outputting an inquiry message for the user (Hadad [0239] the user device may send information to the user with suggestions; [0241] make a suggestions for menu of nearby restaurants); and
when a specific restaurant is selected among searched restaurants, determining that the user is currently located at the selected restaurant (Hadad [0273] the user device can determine the time and geolocation of the user, and the software’s can ask and confirm by the user that the information is correct).
Hadad fails to explicitly disclose the inquiry message for inquiring whether the user is planning to dine to the user; and when receiving a confirmation message from the user in response to the inquiry message, searching for restaurant information mapped to the location information and providing the searched restaurant information to the user.
Bousamra is in the field of food databases (Abstract) and teaches the inquiry message for inquiring whether the user is planning to dine to the user (Bousamra [0020] glucose device includes a food database with a list of hundreds of restaurants, and can be filtered by location, this is an inquiry by the user; [0023] communication amongst the network, to send and receive message between the user and the restaurants); and when receiving a confirmation message from the user in response to the inquiry message, searching for restaurant information mapped to the location information and providing the searched restaurant information to the user (Bousamra [0025] when a user selects a specific restaurant, the software can refine the menu item to specific items that fit their dietary needs). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the user selection in Hadad with the list of restaurant option to select, and refined menu list taught in Bousmra. The motivation for doing so would be to provide accurate health information to a user, and by making selecting menu items easier improving overall health (Bouamra [0002] giving specific menu items improves overall health by giving clear guidance).
Regarding claim 5, Hadad teaches the method of the management server for managing the biometric information based on the location information according to claim 4, further comprising determining whether a current time is within a time range set by the user, wherein when the current time is within the time range set by the user, the determining of whether the restaurant mapped to the location information exists is performed (Hadad [0242-243] there is an optimized time frame for eating, and the time is set by the user, and determining if and when user is at a restaurant at the time; [0273] user device, geolocation with timestamp).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim objection, the amended claim 4 has been corrected.
Regarding 101, the method has been amended to be performed on a management server, which applicant claims is a particular machine. However, Examiner notes that a server is not a particular machine as recited in MPEP 2106.05(b). Under the MPEP 2106.05(b) one of the examples of a particular machine recites a type of antenna, the specific shape, the specific conductors, the length and angle to arrange the antenna, which gives enough details to the machine, that it is more than the abstract idea. In contract, the instant claims recites a management server. Using the term “management” does not give details about the server itself, and a server is not a machine with any details, and remains a general purpose computer.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2004/0133455 A1 McMahon teaches remote monitoring disease management (Abstract); US 2007/0106129 A1 Srivathsa teaches sensors for dietary feedback (Abstract); US 9,754,077 B2 Sysko teaches patient information to create plan (Abstract).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA E SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9501. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th; 9:00 AM-5PM EST.
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, FAHD OBEID can be reached at (571) 270-3324. 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.
/JESSICA E SULLIVAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FAHD A OBEID/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627