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
2. The Amendment filed on May 27, 2026 has been entered. The examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 6, and 7.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicant argues that specification of a number of exchange tokens to be paid upon completion of each task and an exchange rate for rewards induces more active participation and these additional elements integrate the claims into a practical application.
The Examiner disagrees with this line of reasoning and the end result. Providing an amount of reward (tokens) per task completed and the number of tokens that may be redeemed for a reward appears to be an incentive or motivator to elicit action from a human participant. Because the invention does not provide any actual control over the completion of assigned tasks, it fails to integrate the task assignment with actual task execution. Alternatively, if the rewards were not of interest to the participant there would be no incentive, but this does not change the fact that the invention does not integrate a mechanism for task completion (the user).
The requirement for a practical application requires at least one of an improvement in the functioning of a computer, implementing a judicial exception in conduction with a machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim (as discussed earlier), or the application of the invention with technology that demonstrates the use of machine learning or artificial intelligence that is automatically updated (learns) through feedback on the AI/ML output that updates the model with each iteration to produce improved results. Even with the current amendments, none of these requirements are satisfied.
The additional argument of the encryption integrating the task management software into a practical application fails to demonstrate any integration between the two systems. In the application, the task management software employs the encryption as an additional element as if it was a plugin to an information system.
Based on this reasoning and the lack of a practical application, the request to withdraw the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 is denied.
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 capable of performing task management, the operating method comprising:
generating, by, when receiving, from of an administrator, a processing request for a registration procedure for registering to be subjected to the task 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),
sending 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 of the to perform the task according to the first task list, and then providing the first task list and the instruction message to inform the user; (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 of when the user of completes the plurality of tasks, for each of the plurality of tasks included in the first task list from, the reward information for each of the plurality of tasks in the to correspond to the first unique identification information, and then transmitting the reward information for each of the plurality of tasks to the user, wherein the reward information includes a predetermined number of exchange tokens to be paid to the user upon completion of each task, and a number of exchange tokens required for receiving each reward; (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 of 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),
sending 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, sending a query message for querying whether the performing completion of the first task is finally approved to while sending the first reward information to management; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
generating, by, 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 to correspond to the first unique identification information; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
sending, the approval message to the user and simultaneously the first task performing history information; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
pre-storing, by an, 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, 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, sending the encrypted substitution matrix, the encrypted serial number, and the first task performing history information to management, wherein a private key paired with the public key is pre-stored, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
wherein management stores, in advance, the private key, the authentication number, and the hash function in the memory, decrypts, when receiving 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 stored 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 a task management service server, an electronic terminal, a code transmission unit a management terminal a first electronic terminal,
an identification code for identifying a connection session with the management terminal, and transmitting the generated identification code to the management terminal; a registration unit, a management list database, transmitting, a setting request unit, a task setting unit, a reward setting unit, an information extraction unit, an information transmission unit, a history registration unit, transmitting the first task performing history information, authentication information storage unit, history extraction unit, an encryption unit, history transmission unit, a memory, a result information transmission unit, and scanning the 2D code displayed on the screen of the management terminal through a camera mounted on the first electronic terminal.
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
Independent claims 1, 6, and 11 were previously not rejected under 35 U.S.C §
103. Rejections for claims 2 and 7 under 35 U.S.C § 103 were withdrawn based on their dependency on independent claims 1 and 6.
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, (michael.borowski@uspto.gov). The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30.
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
Prosecution Insights