DETAILED ACTION
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 presented for examination.
Claim Objections
Claims refer to the terms “the plurality of attributes” and “the plurality”, it would be better to uniquify to avoid any possible antecedent issues.
Claims refer to the terms “the attribute of the plurality” and “the attribute”, it would be better to uniquify to avoid any possible antecedent issues.
Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
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 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without any additional elements that provide a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Independent claim 1, Step 1: method (process = 2019 PEG Step 1 = yes).
Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong One: Claim recites:
representing the geological data as a plurality of attributes in which a respective attribute of the plurality includes attribute values that correspond to properties of a respective subset of the mineral deposit;
defining an identification system that spatially represents the mineral deposit;
assigning an attribute location value to each attribute of the plurality, the attribute location value describing a respective location within the identification system to which the respective attribute corresponds
The limitations are substantially drawn to mental concepts: observations, evaluations, judgments, opinions, but for the recitation of generic computer components. Information and data also fall within the realm of abstract ideas because information and/or data are intangible. See Electric Power Group1 (Electric Power hereinafter): “Information… is an intangible”.
As to the limitations "representing the geological data as a plurality of attributes in which a respective attribute of the plurality includes attribute values that correspond to properties of a respective subset of the mineral deposit”, they are mental concepts. As drafted and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, they can be characterized as entailing a user deciding/determining (judgments, opinions), i.e., processing data, that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper. The specification reads (underline emphasis added):
"[0048]… the geological data may be represented as individual attributes. A given attribute may include respective attribute values that correspond to properties of a respective subset of the mineral deposit"
As to the limitations "defining an identification system that spatially represents the mineral deposit”, they are mental concepts. Definitions are mental in nature. These limitations, as drafted and under a broadest reasonable interpretation, can be characterized as entailing a user deciding/determining (judgments, opinions), that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper. The specification reads (underline emphasis added):
"[0049]… an identification system that spatially represents the mineral deposit may be defined… defining the identification system may include specifying a three-dimensional grid and an orientation of the three-dimensional grid using a coordinate system that includes x-coordinates, y-coordinates, and z-coordinates… defining the identification system may include specifying each attribute as a respective node to form a set of nodes and assigning relationships between the nodes according to an octree-based storage format in which a given parent node includes eight respective children nodes and each child node respectively includes eight children nodes".
As to the limitations "assigning an attribute location value to each attribute of the plurality, the attribute location value describing a respective location within the identification system to which the respective attribute corresponds”, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, assigning is a mental concept. These activities can be characterized as entailing a user deciding on information that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper (mental processes including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). The specification reads (underline emphasis added):
"[0049]… Assigning the attribute location value to the attribute may then include identifying a three-dimensional sub-grid in the three-dimensional grid from which the geological data corresponding to the attribute is located in which the three-dimensional sub-grid represents a respective subsection of the geological data that corresponds to the respective attribute"
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes, then it falls within the "(c) Mental processes" grouping of abstract ideas (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong One: Abstract Idea Grouping? = Yes, (c) Mental processes).
Independent claim 1, Step 2A Prong two: As to the limitations “obtaining geological data that describes properties relating to a mineral deposit”, these limitations describe the concept of “mere data gathering”, which corresponds to the concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts. Data gathering, including when limited to particular content does not change its character as information, is also within the realm of abstract ideas. Data gathering has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. See Electric Power.
As to the additional element storing the plurality of attributes and attribute location values corresponding to the plurality of attributes using a data storage system, it is recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications.
The 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 (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong Two: Additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception/Abstract idea into a practical application?= NO).
Independent claim 1, Step 2B: As discussed with respect to Step 2A, the claim recites data gathering at a high level of generality; and therefore, these limitations remain insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration. See MPEP § 2106.05(g).
As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, the claim recites the additional element storing the plurality of attributes and attribute location values corresponding to the plurality of attributes using a data storage system at a high level of generality and as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications. Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities amount to no more than implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system. The use of a computer to implement the abstract idea of a mathematical algorithm has not been held by the courts to be enough to qualify as “significantly more”. See MPEP 2106.05. The implementation on a computing system is described in the specification (underline emphasis added):
[0033] Figure 1 is a diagram of an example… of a computer system 100 configured to generate attributes representative of geological data and storage of the attributes…
[0034]… the system 100 may include the geological model module 120… the geological model module 120 may be implemented using hardware including a processor, a microprocessor (e.g., to perform or control performance of one or more operations), a field-programmable gate array (FPGA), or an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC)”.
Thus, taken alone the individual additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the additional elements taken individually. There is no indication that their combination improves the functioning of a computer itself or improves any other technology (underline emphasis added). Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (2019 PEG Step 2B: NO).
Independent claims 8 and 15, Step 2A Prong One: These claims recite substantially the same elements as claim 1 and are rejected for the same reasons above. (See Independent claim 1, Step 2A Prong One above).
Independent claims 8 and 15, Step 2A Prong two and 2B: As to the further additional elements computer-readable storage media, system, and processors, they are interpreted as drawn to a generic computer. (See Independent claim 1, Step 2B above).
Dependent claims, Step 2A, Prong One: Dependent claims limitations further the mental concepts of their independent claims. (See Independent claim 1, Step 2A, Prong One above). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mental processes, then it falls within the "(c) Mental processes" grouping of abstract ideas (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong One: Abstract Idea Grouping? = Yes, (c) Mental processes).
Dependent claims, Step 2A Prong Two: As to the limitations "6/13/20… wherein storing the plurality of attributes and attribute location values using the data storage system includes compressing data associated with an attribute of the plurality that includes the same attribute values and attribute location values that are within a threshold distance of one another"; they represent no more than just “apply it” limitations, because they invoke computers merely as a tool to perform an existing process. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application of the exception (2019 PEG Step 2A, Prong Two: Additional elements that integrate the Judicial exception/Abstract idea into a practical application? = NO).
Dependent claims, Step 2B: As discussed with respect to Step 2A, Prong two, limitations invoking computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process are just “apply it” limitations. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2).The claims do not provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. Therefore, the dependent claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (2019 PEG Step 2B: NO).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, pages, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lin et al., (Lin hereinafter), International Pub. No. CN104915984, taken in view of Brent Assa, (Assa hereinafter), U.S. Pre–Grant publication 20060235666.
As to claim 1, Lin discloses a method, comprising: obtaining geological data that describes properties relating to a mineral deposit (see "attribute model must be the boundary of the space structural model (i.e. polyhedron) as constraint, built into in the external relation structure model by the judging element" in page 2, 2nd paragraph; "modeling of three-dimensional complex ore body comprises three-dimensional modelling a geological structure and three-dimensional modelling method for reflection attributes into two parts. structure model, which means that the model can well express the spatial pattern of complex ore body" in page 1, last paragraph); representing the geological data as a plurality of attributes in which a respective attribute of the plurality includes attribute values that correspond to properties of a respective subset of the mineral deposit (see "mineral deposit" as "target ore body", "an octree-based complex ore body block model… according to the preset minimal vexel size, geological space of a target ore body is divided into multiple 3D grids; according to the internal and external relation between vexels corresponding to the 3D grids and boundary of the geological space, the vexels are screened in a grid scanning method; and according to the hierarchy of octree nodes, the screened vexels are merged to form an octree model" in Abstract); defining an identification system that spatially represents the mineral deposit (see "preset minimum voxel size, the geological space of target ore into a plurality of three-dimensional grid, the grid row, column, layer number is N, wherein N=2l, l is the level number of the octree" in page 2)…
Lin does not disclose, but Assa discloses assigning an attribute location value to each attribute of the plurality, the attribute location value describing a respective location within the identification system to which the respective attribute corresponds (see "[0098] At each point along the channel we measure the cross section and record its position relative to the image coordinate axes whose origin is the lower left corner of the picture. Given the previous position of the cross section, we compute the update to the (x,y) plane rotation and translation"); and storing the plurality of attributes and attribute location values corresponding to the plurality of attributes using a data storage system (see "[0274]… the shape synopsis diagram (SSD) of the torus shown in FIG. 19a. The SSD reports locations in normal position coordinates and uses a homogeneous transformation to correctly position this data in model space. We also note that an SSD takes little storage beyond that already needed to instantiate the b-rep"; "[0569]… an important implicit surface data structure is the narrow band octree").
Lin and Assa are analogous art because they are related to geological modelling.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Assa with Lin, because Assa represents "[0280]… an implicit surface's signed distance function in a narrow band octree encoding of a regularly spaced Cartesian grid", and as a result, Assa reports that "[0569]… an important implicit surface data structure is the narrow band octree. The curvature analytical enhancements to implicit surface technology described herein enable the construction a reservoir framework using significantly less memory and CPU than conventional triangulated surface technology requires. Additionally, the curvature-based methods describe herein enable the construction of a new generation of structural framework".
As to claim 2, Lin discloses wherein defining the identification system includes specifying a three-dimensional grid and an orientation of the three-dimensional grid using a coordinate system that includes x-coordinates, y-coordinates, and z-coordinates (see "Three-dimensional grid of voxels corresponding to the geological space boundary" in page 2; "according to the minimum voxel size of the preset, the geological space of target ore into a plurality of three-dimensional grid" in page 5).
As to claim 3, Lin discloses wherein assigning the attribute location value to the attribute of the plurality includes identifying a three-dimensional sub-grid in the three-dimensional grid from which the geological data corresponding to the attribute is located (see "according to the minimum voxel size of the preset, the geological space of target ore into a plurality of three-dimensional grid. wherein the grid row, column, layer number is N" in page 5), the three-dimensional sub-grid representing a respective subsection of the geological data that corresponds to the respective attribute (see "modeling of three-dimensional complex ore body comprises three-dimensional modelling a geological structure and three-dimensional modelling method for reflection attributes into two parts. structure model, which means that the model can well express the spatial pattern of complex ore body" in page 1, last paragraph).
As to claim 4, Lin discloses wherein assigning the attribute location value to the attribute of the plurality includes: identifying a three-dimensional sub-grid in the three-dimensional grid from which the geological data corresponding to the attribute is located (see "an octree-based complex ore block segment model construction system, the system comprises a dividing unit 201, a screening unit 202 and combining unit 203. the minimum voxel size divided unit 201, according to the preset, the geological space of target divided into a plurality of three-dimensional grid. selecting unit 202, used for according to the three-dimensional grid of voxels corresponding to the geological space boundary in the outer relation, by grid scanning method to the screening body element" in page 7); and determining a size of the three-dimensional sub-grid (see "preset minimum voxel size, the geological space divided into a plurality of three-dimensional regular grid (regular hexahedron) form a pseudo-eight-branch tree. pseudo eight-branch tree in each of the three-dimensional grid is a voxel size of each voxel is a predetermined minimum size" in page 5); determining a relative x-coordinate offset, a relative y-coordinate offset, and a relative z-coordinate offset between the three-dimensional sub-grid and the three-dimensional grid based on a location in the mineral deposit from which the geological data corresponding to the attribute is collected; and determining the attribute location value based on the size of the three-dimensional sub-grid, the relative x-coordinate offset, the relative y-coordinate offset, and the relative z-coordinate offset (see "an octree-based complex ore block segment model construction system, the system comprises a dividing unit 201, a screening unit 202 and combining unit 203. the minimum voxel size divided unit 201, according to the preset, the geological space of target divided into a plurality of three-dimensional grid. selecting unit 202, used for according to the three-dimensional grid of voxels corresponding to the geological space boundary in the outer relation, by grid scanning method to the screening body element" in page 7).
As to claim 5, Lin discloses wherein defining the identification system includes specifying each attribute of the plurality as a respective node to form a plurality of nodes and assigning relationships between the plurality of nodes according to an octree-based storage format in which a given parent node of the plurality of nodes includes eight respective children nodes (see "an octree-based complex ore block segment model construction system, the system comprises a dividing unit 201, a screening unit 202 and combining unit 203. the minimum voxel size divided unit 201, according to the preset, the geological space of target divided into a plurality of three-dimensional grid. selecting unit 202, used for according to the three-dimensional grid of voxels corresponding to the geological space boundary in the outer relation, by grid scanning method to the screening body element" in page 7; "hierarchical relationship of the octree node, combining the voxel after screening to form eight-branch tree model" in page 2).
As to claim 6, Assa discloses wherein storing the plurality of attributes and attribute location values using the data storage system includes compressing data associated with an attribute of the plurality that includes the same attribute values and attribute location values that are within a threshold distance of one another (see "[0594] The seismic data collected from recording unit 170 which is usually a relatively large data set… data processing to generate an efficient and robust subdivision of shapes representing the seismic data is performed on data processor 180. In this way a compressed, stable, accurate representation of new data is transmitted to other processing centers").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Assa with Lin, (see supra).
As to claim 7, Lin discloses wherein the properties of the mineral deposit include physical properties that include at least one of: (see "modeling of three-dimensional complex ore body comprises three-dimensional modelling a geological structure and three-dimensional modelling method for reflection attributes into two parts. structure model, which means that the model can well express the spatial pattern of complex ore body" in page 1, last paragraph).
As to claims 8-20, these claims recite computer-readable storage media and a system for performing the method of claims 1-7. Lin discloses an algorithm (see page 6, 2nd paragraph) for performing a method that teaches claims 1-7. Therefore, claims 8-20 are rejected for the same reasons given above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Claude Dulac et al., U.S. Patent 7711532, discloses "Loc(Vi) can be e.g. (i,j,k) where i, j and k are indexes (or coordinates) which allow the position of the associated voxel Vi in the referential of the 3D screen to be defined" (see col. 9, lines 38-40), 'method… comprises the following steps A "3D screen construction step" for constructing a 3D screen which is a 3D elementary partition covering the geological domain, said 3D screen being composed of a plurality of voxels (Vi) which are elementary volume elements, A "voxel painting step" for associating a cell identifier (Cell-id) to each voxel, A "cell definition step" for defining the cells of the geological domain, each cell of the geological domain being defined as the subset of voxels of the 3D screen associated to the same cell identifier' (see col. 8, lines 49-60), and "thereby allowing the definition of the cells of the geological domain without having to code the geometry and/or topology of said cells in said geological volume" (see col. 8, lines 62-64).
Examiner would like to point out that any reference to specific figures, pages, columns and lines should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN CARLOS OCHOA whose telephone number is (571)272-2625. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays 9:30AM - 8:00 PM.
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, Renee Chavez can be reached at 571-270-1104. 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.
/JUAN C OCHOA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2186
1 Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 119 USPQ2d 1739 Fed. Cir. 2016
Prosecution Insights