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 .
Response to Arguments
The Amendment filed on September 18, 2025 has been entered. The examiner
acknowledges the amendments to claims 1-2, 6-7, 11, and the cancellation of claims 3-5 and 8-10.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicant argues that abstract ideas are integrated into a practical application through enhancing the security of the data encryption in the invention. MPEP lists examples of practical applications that integrate judicial exceptions through an additional element or combination of additional elements. These examples cite an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, implementing or using a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, or applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. In this case the claims indicate a software intensive application of processors to perform task management and support administration. This appears to be an instance of capable software applied in a computer environment. It is not apparent that the invention even with the current amendments, delivers a practical application.
Thus, the Examiner rejects the argument that the abstract ideas are integrated into a practical application and finds the argument for allowance not compelling, and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 will not be withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant’s arguments in favor of independent claims 1,6, and 11 are compelling and rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been withdrawn. Rejections for claims 2 and 7 are withdrawn based on their dependency on independent claims 1 and 6.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 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 1-2, 6-7, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims, 1-2, 6-7, 11 are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, abstract idea) without providing significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis per MPEP § 2106.03, required the claims to be a process, machine, manufacture or a composition of matter. Claims 1-2, 6-7, 11 are directed to a process (method), machine (system), and product/article of manufacture, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 11 are directed to abstract ideas, as explained below.
Prong one of the Step 2A analysis requires identifying the specific limitation(s) in the claim under examination that the examiner believes recites an abstract idea, and determining whether the identified limitation(s) falls within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas of mathematical concepts, mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activity.
Step 2A-Prong 1
The claims recite the following limitations that are directed to abstract ideas, which can be summarized as being directed to a method, the abstract idea, of an administrator managing the completion of tasks by a worker.
Claim 6 discloses a method, comprising: An operating method of a task management service server capable of performing a task the operating method comprising:
generating, when receiving, from an administrator, a processing request for a registration procedure for registering a first electronic terminal to be subjected to the task management, an identification code for identifying a connection session with management, and transmitting the generated identification code to management; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
identifying, when receiving first unique identification information jointly with the identification code the connection session with management based on the identification code, and storing the first unique identification information as the unique identification information in a management list; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
transmitting a setting request instruction for requesting setting a task list to be performed by a user to management; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
storing, when receiving, from management, a first task list, wherein the first task list is a list constituted by information on each of a plurality of tasks specified for the user to perform and information on a time zone in which each of the plurality of tasks is to be performed in response to the setting request instruction, the first task list in a management list to correspond to the first unique identification information, generating an instruction message for instructing the user to perform the task according to the first task list, and then transmitting the first task list and the instruction message; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
storing, when receiving a reward information registration request instruction together with reward information, wherein the reward information for each of the plurality of tasks means reward information specified to be provided to the user when the user completes the plurality of tasks, for each of the plurality of tasks included in the first task list from management, the reward information for each of the plurality of tasks in the management list to correspond to the first unique identification information, and then transmitting the reward information for each of the plurality of tasks; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
confirming, the first task list and the reward information for each of the plurality of tasks stored to correspond to the first unique identification information
in the management list, extracting information on a first task and information on a first time zone from the first task list, and extracting first reward information for the first task among the reward information for each the plurality of tasks, when the user completes performing the first task in the first time zone specified as the first task is to be performed among the plurality of tasks and as a performing completion instruction for the first task is applied, the performing completion instruction indicating that performing the first task is completed is received jointly with the first unique identification information; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
transmitting, the information on the first task and the information on the first time zone to management as description information on the task completed by the user, and at the same time, transmitting a query message for querying whether the performing completion of the first task is finally approved by management while transmitting the first reward information to management; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
generating, when receiving, in response to the query message, an approval message indicating that the performing completion of the first task is finally approved from management, first task performing history information constituted by date/time information of a current time point, information on the first task, information on the first time zone, and the first reward information, and then storing the first task performing history information in the management list to correspond to the first unique identification information; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
transmitting the approval message to the first user and simultaneously transmitting the first task performing history information; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
pre-storing, an n-digit authentication number and a predetermined hash function which is shared in advance with management; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
extracting, when receiving, from management, a provision request instruction of the first task performing history information stored in correspondence to the first unique identification information in the management list, from the management list, the first task performance history information stored in correspondence to the first unique identification information; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion), randomly generating, an n-digit serial number, generating a column vector having each digit of numbers constituting the serial number as a component and a row vector having each digit of numbers constituting the authentication number as a component, computing a matrix multiplication between the column vector and the row vector to generate an n x n size computation matrix, randomly selecting a first component which is one of the components constituting the computation matrix, applying the first component to the hash function as an input to generate a first hash value, and encrypting the first task performing history information based on the first hash value; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion), and
substituting, the first component in the computation matrix used to obtain the first hash value with a randomly generated dummy component to generate a substitution matrix, encrypting each of the substitution matrix and the serial number with a predetermined public key, transmitting the encrypted substitution matrix, the encrypted serial number, and the encrypted first task performing history information to management, wherein a private key paired with the public key is pre-stored in the management terminal, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
wherein management stores, in advance, the private key, the authentication
number, and the hash function, decrypts, when receiving, from management, the encrypted substitution matrix, the encrypted serial number, and the encrypted first task performing history information, each of the substitution matrix and the serial number based on the private key, and then generates a column vector having respective digits of numbers constituting the decrypted serial number as the component and a row vector having respective digits of numbers constituting the authentication number stored as the component, and computes the matrix multiplication between the column vector and the row vectors to generate the computation matrix having an n x n size, and then compares the computation matrix and the decrypted substitution matrix, and extracts a component in the computation matrix, which does not match the substitution matrix as the first component, and
applies the first component to the hash function as the input to calculate the first hash value, and then decrypts the encrypted first task performing history information
based on the first hash value, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion).
Additional limitations employ the method to achieve unique identification information verification, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, - claim 7).
Each of these claimed limitations employ managing personal behavior- following rules or instructions, and mental processes involving observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion.
Claims 1-2, 11 recite similar abstract ideas as those identified with respect to claims 6-7.
Thus, the concepts set forth in claims 1-2, 6-7, 11 recite abstract ideas.
Step 2A-Prong 2
As per MPEP § 2106.04, while the claims 1-2, 6-7, 11 recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements such as an electronic terminal, database, a camera, a code transmission unit, a registration unit, a setting request unit, a task setting unit, a reward setting unit, a history registration unit, an information extraction unit, a history extraction unit, an authentication information storage unit, a result information transmission unit, an information transmission unit, an encryption unit, and a history transmission unit, these limitations are not sufficient to qualify as a practical application being recited in the claims along with the abstract ideas since these elements are invoked as tools to apply the instructions of the abstract ideas in a specific technological environment. The mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.05 (f) & (h)).
Evaluated individually, the additional elements do not integrate the identified abstract ideas into a practical application. Evaluating the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually.
The claims do not amount to a “practical application” of the abstract idea because they neither (1) recite any improvements to another technology or technical field; (2) recite any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; (3) apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; (4) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; (5) provide other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, claims 1-2, 6-7, 11 are directed to abstract ideas.
Step 2B
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 11 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
The analysis above describes how the claims recite the additional elements beyond those identified above as being directed to an abstract idea, as well as why identified judicial exception(s) are not integrated into a practical application. These findings are hereby incorporated into the analysis of the additional elements when considered both individually and in combination.
For the reasons provided in the analysis in Step 2A, Prong 1, evaluated individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception.
Evaluating the claim limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. In addition to the factors discussed regarding Step 2A, prong two, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely amount to instructions to implement the identified abstract ideas on a computer.
Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claims 1-2, 6-7, 11 that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, the claims are directed to non-statutory subject matter and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
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.
6. Claims 1, 6, and 11, are not rejected by prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Dependent claims 2 and 7 are not rejected because of their inherent dependency on claims 1, and 6.
The closest prior art to the invention includes Herrero, (US 20020078007 A1), hereafter Herrero, “Task Management Program,” Sung, (KR102244290B1), hereafter Sung, “Encryption Communication Apparatus That Supports Secure Communications Between a Data Transmitting Apparatus and a Data Receiving Apparatus, and the Operating Method Thereof,” and Zhang, “Verifiable Outsourcing Computation for
Matrix Multiplication With Improved Efficiency and Applicability,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal (Volume: 5, Issue: 6, 2018, Page(s): 5076-5088). None of the prior art alone or in combination teach the claimed invention as recited in this claim wherein the novelty is in the combination of all the limitations and not in a single limitation.
Regarding claim 1, A task management service server capable of performing task management for an electronic terminal, comprising: [ ], a code transmission unit, [ ], a registration unit, [ ], a setting request unit, [ ], a task setting unit, [ ], a reward setting unit, [ ], an information extraction unit, [ ], an information transmission unit, [], a history registration unit, a result information unit, [ ], an authentication information storage unit, [ ], a history extraction unit, [ ], an encryption unit, [ ], and a history transmission unit, [ ], performing steps of encryption and decryption, and then decrypts the encrypted first task performing history information based on the first hash value, prior art teaches some of these capabilities and features but none individually or in combination teach the complete scope of the claim wherein the novelty is in the combination of all the limitations and not in a single limitation.
Herrero teaches the task management service server and a number of the
process steps and functions of the invention. Sung teaches aspects of the encryption process but not all of the claimed encryption techniques. Zhang teaches more advanced approaches to matrix multiplication applicable for encryption, but still does not teach all of the claimed invention.
None of the prior art alone or in combination teaches the claimed invention as recited in claims 1, 6, and 11 wherein the novelty is in the combination of all the limitations and not in a single limitation.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure or directed to the state of the art is listed on the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL BOROWSKI whose telephone number is (703)756-1822. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 4:00.
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 on (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.
/MB/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/MEHMET YESILDAG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624