DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 4-9, 12-17 and 20 are pending. Claims 1, 4, 9, 12, and 17 are amended. Claims 2, 3, 10, 11, 18, and 19 are cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The reference listed in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 01/05/2026 have been considered by the examiner (see attached PTO-1449 forms).
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, 4-9, 12-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites an information processing device comprising a control unit configured to: receive a request for a product search from a user terminal;
extract product information of a product corresponding to the received request from a product database, the product information including emission information indicating an emission amount of greenhouse gas of the product in association with a production site of the product;
return the extracted product information to the user terminal such that an output of the emission information in association with the production site is allowed;
and display the extracted product information on a display of the user terminal; wherein when the production site of the product includes a first type site that utilizes renewable energy, the emission information of the product includes comparison information indicating the emission amount of the greenhouse gas of the product and a reduction amount in an emission of the greenhouse gas achieved in a manner that the product is produced at the first type site rather than the second type site that does not utilize the renewable energy, and the output of the emission information includes an output of the comparison information.
Claim 9 recites an information processing method executed by a computer, the information processing method comprising:
receiving a request for a product search from a user terminal;
extracting product information of a product corresponding to the received request from a product database, the product information including emission information indicating an emission amount of greenhouse gas of the product in association with a production site of the product;
returning the extracted product information to the user terminal such that an output of the emission information in association with the production site is allowed; and
displaying the extracted product information on a display of the user terminal; wherein when the production site of the product includes a first type site that utilizes renewable energy, the emission information of the product includes comparison information indicating the emission amount of the greenhouse gas of the product and a reduction amount in an emission of the greenhouse gas achieved in a manner that the product is produced at the first type site rather than the second type site that does not utilize the renewable energy, and the output of the emission information includes an output of the comparison information.
Claim 17, recites a non-transitory storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to execute an information processing method, the information processing method comprising:
receiving a request for a product search from a user terminal;
extracting product information of a product corresponding to the received request from a product database, the product information including emission information indicating an emission amount of greenhouse gas of the product in association with a production site of the product;
returning the extracted product information to the user terminal such that an output of the emission information in association with the production site is allowed; and displaying the extracted product information on a display of the user terminal; wherein when the production site of the product includes a first type site that utilizes renewable energy, the emission information of the product includes comparison information indicating the emission amount of the greenhouse gas of the product and a reduction amount in an emission of the greenhouse gas achieved in a manner that the product is produced at the first type site rather than the second type site that does not utilize the renewable energy, and the output of the emission information includes an output of the comparison information.
and thus grouped as Mental Processes – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion).
These judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements, the data gathering step, (claim 1) “receive a request for a product search from a user terminal” (claim 9) “receiving a request for a product search from a user terminal” (claim 17) “receiving a request for a product search from a user terminal” are mere data gathering that do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity. Furthermore, the additional elements (claim 10) “control unit and computer ” are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications. Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions amount to no more than using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Furthermore, the additional elements, “returning the extracted product information to the user terminal” and “display the extracted product information on a display of the user terminal” is merely outputting the results which do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are post-solution activity. All of which are considered not indicative of integration into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of the data gathering steps and outputting/displaying are mere data collection steps which fall under insignificant extra solution activity and post-solution activity and deemed insufficient to qualify as “significantly more” - see MPEP 2106.05(g). The additional elements of the control unit and computer are mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and deemed insufficient to qualify as “significantly more” see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Dependent claims 4-8, 12-16 and 20 when analyzed as a whole are patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the dependent claims fail to establish that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea as they are directed mathematical concepts and/or mental processes and do not add significantly more to the abstract idea.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-9, 12-17 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 1 is objected to because the closest prior art, Outlaw [US 2017/0160119 A1], fails to anticipate or render obvious when the production site of the product includes a first type site that utilizes renewable energy, the emission information of the product includes comparison information indicating the emission amount of the greenhouse gas of the product and a reduction amount in an emission of the greenhouse gas achieved in a manner that the product is produced at the first type site rather than the second type site that does not utilize the renewable energy, and the output of the emission information includes an output of the comparison information, in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as defined by applicant.
Claim 9 is objected to because the closest prior art, Outlaw [US 2017/0160119 A1], fails to anticipate or render obvious when the production site of the product includes a first type site that utilizes renewable energy, the emission information of the product includes comparison information indicating the emission amount of the greenhouse gas of the product and a reduction amount in an emission of the greenhouse gas achieved in a manner that the product is produced at the first type site rather than the second type site that does not utilize the renewable energy, and the output of the emission information includes an output of the comparison information, in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as defined by applicant.
Claim 17 is objected to because the closest prior art, Outlaw [US 2017/0160119 A1], fails to anticipate or render obvious when the production site of the product includes a first type site that utilizes renewable energy, the emission information of the product includes comparison information indicating the emission amount of the greenhouse gas of the product and a reduction amount in an emission of the greenhouse gas achieved in a manner that the product is produced at the first type site rather than the second type site that does not utilize the renewable energy, and the output of the emission information includes an output of the comparison information, in combination with all other limitations in the claim(s) as defined by applicant.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/22/2025 regarding the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, second paragraph, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1, 9 and 17 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant argues the claims amended now recite additional elements that incorporate any abstract ides into a practical application, (i.e. control unit is configured to display the extracted product information on a display of the user terminal) (see page 7, first paragraph of the response).
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees indicates the additional elements, “returning the extracted product information to the user terminal” and “display the extracted product information on a display of the user terminal” is merely outputting the results which do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are post-solution activity. Of which is considered not indicative of integration into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Relevant Prior Art / Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McConnell et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2010/0070423 A1) discloses a system and method for tracking and reporting greenhouse gas emissions.
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 RICKY GO whose telephone number is (571)270-3340. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Arleen M. Vazquez can be reached on (571) 272-2619. 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 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RICKY GO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857