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 .
Claims 1-20 are active in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/15/2022 and 02/16/2023 are 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because, regarding claims 1, 12 and 17, the claimed invention is directed to Judicial Exceptions without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because,
Step 2A: Prong One: yes, invention directed to judicial exception of abstract idea.
In claims 1, 12 and 17, limitations reciting the abstract idea are as follows:
“generating…”, “typing…” is a mental process that can be performed in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper, either through observation, evaluation, judgment and opinion and applied in a computing environment. (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III), see also Elec. Power Grp., LLC v. Alstom SA., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (concluding that "analyzing information by steps people go through in their minds, or by mathematical algorithms, without more, [are] essentially mental processes within the abstract-idea category"); Content Extraction & Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, Nat'! Ass 'n, 776 F.3d 1343, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (concluding that claims drawn to collecting data, recognizing certain data within the collected set, and storing the recognized data were patent ineligible, noting that "humans have always performed these functions").
The limitations are a process that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, but for the recitation of generic computer components or generic tools. Nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in a human mind or with the aid of pen and paper. Thus, the limitation recites an abstract mental process because it can be performed in the human mind either through observation, evaluation, judgment and opinion.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, the it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Step 2A prong two: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites additional elements “assign…”, the limitations are a mere generic function which is considered to be insignificant extra solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) that does not confer patent eligibility. See, e.g., Bancorp Servs., L.L.C. v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can. (U.S.), 687 F.3d 1266, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2012), aff'g 771 F. Supp. 2d 1054, 1065 (E.D. Mo. 2011) (explaining that “[s]toring, retrieving, and providing data... are inconsequential data gathering and insignificant post solution activity”).
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than abstract idea. Aside from the abstract idea, the additional elements (assign) are conventional and well known (MPEP 2106.05(d)). Mortg. Grader, Inc. v. First Choice Loan Servs. Inc., 811 F.3d 1314, 1324-25 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (generic computer components, such as an "interface," “processor”, "network," and "database," fail to satisfy the inventive concept requirement); see also In re TLI Commc'ns LLC Pat. Litig., 823 F.3d 607,614 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding generic computer components insufficient to add an inventive concept to an otherwise abstract idea).
Additionally, dependent claims incorporate the features of the corresponding independent claims. Dependent claims do not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception to the claims. The ordered combination of elements in the dependent claims (including the limitations inherited from the parent claim(s)) add nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation. Accordingly, the subject matter encompassed by the dependent claims fails to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Examiner's Note
The Examiner respectfully requests of the Applicants in preparing responses, to fully consider the entirety of the references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention.
It is noted, REFERENCES ARE RELEVANT AS PRIOR ART FOR ALL THEY CONTAIN. "The use of patents as references is not Limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the Literature of the art, relevant for all they contain." In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including non-preferred embodiments (see MPEP 2123).
The Examiner has cited particular locations in the reference(s) as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicants. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claims, typically other passages and figures will apply as well.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9, 12-15, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rogynskyy (US 2019/0361879).
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 17, Rogynskyy discloses a system, a computer-implemented method and a computer program product, comprising: a memory that stores computer executable components; and a processor that executes the computer executable components stored in the memory (Figure 30), wherein the computer executable components comprise:
a pattern component that: generates a pattern that represents a cluster of entities, wherein the entities have a common type (Abstract, [0003], [0010], [0016], pattern of group node profile, group entities); and
types an untyped entity based on the pattern, wherein the common type is assigned to the untyped entity ([0016], [0121] and [0136]-[0137]).
Regarding claim 2, Rogynskyy discloses wherein one or more entities in the cluster of entities are respectively identified by a string ([0091]-[0093], [0114]).
Regarding claim 3, Rogynskyy discloses The system of claim 2, wherein the string is at least one of a sequence of speech, text, alphanumerics, letters, or numbers ([0091]-[0093], [0114]).
Regarding claim 4, Rogynskyy discloses The system of claim 2, further comprising: a code component that identifies one or more codes within the string respectively pertaining to the one or more entities in the cluster of entities ([0091]-[0093], [0114]).
Regarding claim 5, Rogynskyy discloses The system of claim 4, further comprising: a weight component that applies a weight to the code identified in the one or more codes ([0114], weight and [0276]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 6, Rogynskyy discloses The system of claim 5, further comprising: a vector component that vectors the weighted codes to create the cluster ([0276]-[0277]).
Regarding claim 7, Rogynskyy discloses The system of claim 1, wherein the pattern pertains to a Named-Entity Recognition domain ([0023], [0125] and [0136]).
Regarding claims 8 and 15, Rogynskyy discloses a matching component that determines whether the pattern is accurately identifying an untyped entity has the same format as a typed entity ([0136]-[0137]).
Regarding claim 9, Rogynskyy discloses The system of claim 8, the matching component further: identifies the pattern in a statement, wherein the statement provides context regarding the untyped entity ([0093], [0114], [0119] and [0121]); and determines whether the context matches the type assigned to the untyped entity by the pattern ([0093], [0114], [0119] and [0121]).
Regarding claims 13 and 18, Rogynskyy discloses wherein the one or more entities in the cluster of entities are respectively identified by a string, the respective string is at least one of a sequence of speech, text, alphanumerics, letters, or numbers ([0091]-[0093], [0114]).
Regarding claims 14 and 19, Rogynskyy discloses identifying, by the device, one or more codes within the string respectively pertaining to the one or more entities in the cluster of entities ([0114], weight and [0276]-[0277]); applying, by the device, a weight to the code identified in the one or more codes ([0114], weight and [0276]-[0277]); and vectorizing, by the device, the weighted codes to create the cluster ([0114], weight and [0276]-[0277]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11, 16 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if overcome the 101 rejection and rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Saxena (US 2024/0135678) discloses pattern recognition for identifying indistinct entities.
O’Malley (US 20260004371) discloses System And Method For Predictive Analysis, Scenario Simulation, And Decision Optimization Using Dynamic Modeling And Actionable Insights.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MERILYN P NGUYEN whose telephone number is 571-272-4026. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kavita Stanley can be reached on (571) 272-8352. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197.
/MERILYN P NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2153
March 07, 2026