DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the claims filed May 27, 2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are amended
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 and 103
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 Amendments
Claims 1-20 are still pending in this application.
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 to under 35 U.S.C 101 as not being directed to eligible subject matter based on the grounds set out in detail below:
Independent Claims 1, 9, and 15:
Eligibility Step 1 (does the subject matter fall within a statutory category?):Independent Claim 1 falls within the statutory category of machine. Independent Claim 9 falls within the statutory category of method. Independent Claim 15 falls within the statutory category of article of manufacture.
Eligibility Step 2A-1 (does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?): Independent claims 1, 9, and 15 (claim 1 being representative) claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim elements which set forth the abstract idea in the independent claims (claim 1 being representative) is:
using biometric information of a search target person, and thereby selecting a candidate having a possibility of being the search target person;
acquiring medical information comprising a medical history of the search target person;
acquiring, medical information comprising a medical history of the candidate;
and using the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate, and thereby generating possibility information being information corresponding to a possibility that the candidate is the search target person, wherein each of the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate includes a plurality of items,
and wherein generating the possibility information comprises ….[…]…a similarity degree for each of the plurality of items;
and generating the possibility information by using the similarity degree for each of the plurality of items.
This abstract idea is “mental process” as it is merely an evaluation of data to make a decision on a possible candidate being a search target person (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III)
Eligibility Step 2A-2 (does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?): For Independent claim 1, 9, and 15 judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Independent claim 1 recites the additional claim elements below:
A person determination apparatus with a memory and at least one processor which executes computing
A candidate storage unit
Examiner takes the applicable considerations stated in MPEP 2106.04 (d) and analyzes them below in light of the instant applications disclosure and claim elements as a whole.
The additional element, A person determination apparatus with a memory and at least one processor which executes computing, is executing the abstract idea and recited as a general computer element or tool as “apply-it” to apply the abstract idea
The additional element, A candidate storage unit, is recited as a general computer element or tool as “apply-it” to apply the abstract idea to store data
The additional element, computing, is recited as a general computer tool as “apply-it” to apply the abstract idea to store data
Independent claim 9 recites the additional claim elements below not already recited in claim 1:
A computer
Examiner takes the applicable considerations stated in MPEP 2106.04 (d) and analyzes them below in light of the instant applications disclosure and claim elements as a whole.
The additional element, A computer, is executing the abstract idea and recited as a general computer element or tool as “apply-it” to apply the abstract idea
Independent claim 15 recites the additional claim elements below not already recited in claim 1:
A non-transitory storage medium storing a program within a computer
Examiner takes the applicable considerations stated in MPEP 2106.04 (d) and analyzes them below in light of the instant applications disclosure and claim elements as a whole.
The additional element, non-transitory storage medium storing a program within a computer, is executing the abstract idea and recited as a general computer element or tool as “apply-it” to apply the abstract idea
Accordingly, independent claims 1, 9, and 15 as a whole does not integrate the recited abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.04(d)(1).
Eligibility Step 2B (Does the claim amount to significantly more?): The independent claims do does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the computer element as analyzed above in step 2A prong 2, is merely applying the abstract idea and therefore, does not amount to significantly more. The claim is patent ineligible.
Dependent Claims 2-8, 10-14, and 16-20:
Eligibility Step 1 (does the subject matter fall within a statutory category?): The dependent claims 2-8 fall within the statutory category of machine. Independent Claim 10-14 falls within the statutory category of method. Independent Claim 16-20 falls within the statutory category of article of manufacture.
Eligibility Step 2A-1 (does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?): Dependent claims 2-8, 10-14, and 16-20 claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims continue to limit the independent claims abstract idea by (1) further limiting the determination of the person and (2) further limiting generation of data. Therefore, the dependent claims inherit the same abstract idea which is “mental process” as it is merely an evaluation of data to make a decision on a possible candidate being a search target person (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III)
Eligibility Step 2A-2 (does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?): For claims 2-8, 10-14, and 16-20 this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
The dependent claims recite no additional elements not already recited in the independent claims and is thus purely reciting the abstract idea.
Accordingly, the dependent claims as a whole do not integrate the recited abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.04(d)(1).
Eligibility Step 2B (Does the claim amount to significantly more?): The dependent claims do not include additional elements and purely recite the abstract idea. The claims are patent ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, and 19 is rejected to under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piccini (US20220367015A1) in view of Benini (US11250078B2)
As per claim 1, Piccini teaches:
A person determination apparatus comprising: at least one memory configured to store instructions; And at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising: ([0056] discloses, “The data and images collected are either saved in the memory storage or transmitted wirelessly to a computing device or hard drive”) using biometric information of a search target person, and thereby selecting a candidate having a possibility of being the search target person; ([0047] discloses, “Additionally , another important use of the system of the present invention is that it can be used to help find a missing person such as a child . If a child gets lost or is kidnapped , it may be likely that there is no record of the child's fingerprints that are rapidly accessible.” And see [0002] discloses, “The present invention relates to a system for logging biometric and medical data of individuals ( including all women , men and children ) , and more specifically relates to a system for collecting , matching , storing , and providing universal access to the medical data of an individual via a biometric reading or scan of the individual , and rapidly conveying the data to all paramedics , first responders , all hospital doctors , authorized medical professionals , and medical personnel . More specifically , the present invention provides a system to be used in real - time especially during EMERGENCY situations , to promptly assist any individual that is not responding and is in critical condition . In addition , the system of the present invention provides the option to include every individual's choice to donate organs and the individual's specific DNR ( Do Not Resuscitate ) instructions and unique wishes of after - death instruction.” And see [0040] discloses, “One important use of the system of the present invention is for the timely identification of victims of catastrophe or tragedy . For instance , with the most recent tsunami and violent tornados , there has been a problem identifying the deceased . Bodies are often found without any means of identification on them , and their biometric data is not always logged . The system of the present invention solves this issue by providing an efficient and expedient means by which an individual , living or deceased , may be identified.”)
acquiring medical information comprising a medical history of the search target person; ([0058] discloses, “Advantages of the present invention should be understood to be the following:” and see [0059] discloses, “Keep an updated and accurate medical record data of all individuals to avoid possible errors and wrong diagnoses , especially in emergency situations. Allow access for a prompt responder when emergency medical assistance is required .” And see [0060] discloses, “Save precious time for doctors and to help them to make vital decisions in an emergency.” And see [0061] discloses, “Combat fraud nationally” and see [0062] discloses, “Identify unknown victim” and see [0063] discloses, “Help to find missing individuals and children via biometric identification.” And see [0064] discloses, “DNR Instructions.” And see [0065] discloses, “After - death Instructions.” And see [0066] discloses, “Increase organs donors in the nation and world wide.” And see [0067] discloses, “Identify “ in real - time ” registered organ donor”)
acquiring, from a candidate storage unit, medical information comprising a medical history of the candidate; ([0056] discloses, “The present invention involves the creation of a mechanism to be used during a critical emergency — and in general when needed — wherein an individual's biometric identification links to his or her medical data , and is stored into a digital coded data application via safe guards and database clouding . By scanning and saving an individual's fingerprint , linked to his or her personal medical information , and combining these items into a compartmentalized file , the present invention ensures that the fingerprint image is accurately matched with the correct medical data of the individual . The data and images collected are either saved in the memory storage or transmitted wirelessly to a computing device or hard drive.” And see [0057] discloses, “The system of the present invention provides the mechanism for the biometric signature of an individual to be intrinsically linked to ( and facilitating the access thereof ) the medical data and identity data of that individual , including but not limited to : the individual's name , age , blood type , allergies , medical history , medical records , family hereditary record history , dental records , dental charts , pharmaceutical records , lab results , radiology information , prescription information , prescription history , OTC medications , health insurance information , DNA ( if sequenced ) , and emergency contact information . …[…]…” and see / Examiner notes that the potential candidate can be necessarily the search target person)
and using the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate, and thereby generating possibility information being information corresponding to a possibility that the candidate is the search target person. ([0036] discloses, “The system employs a biometric authentication and identification mechanism which links an individual's biometric scan to his or her medical data , medical history , medical records , and emergency contact information . The medical data of the individual may include the individual's name , age , blood type , allergies , medication ( the kind ) , and dental records — in other words , the most valuable medical information associated with the individual's most recent medical record . For example , the individual's medical condition , such as diabetes , asthma ,or a particular blood pressure or even the most recent surgery that the individual is known to have under gone , is greatly useful for the prompt emergency aid procedures and for successful diagnosis assistance.” And see [0057] discloses, “The present invention is a computerized Emer gency medical data reference system equipped with multiple components . Data of the system is identity - restricted , and requires physical biometric authentication at the point - of use for access . The system of the present invention provides the mechanism for the biometric signature of an individual to be intrinsically linked to ( and facilitating the access thereof ) the medical data and identity data of that individual , including but not limited to : the individual's name , age , blood type , allergies , medical history , medical records , fam ily hereditary record history , dental records , dental charts , pharmaceutical records , lab results , radiology information , prescription information , prescription history , OTC medica tions , health insurance information , DNA ( if sequenced ) , and emergency contact information .”)
wherein each of the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate includes a plurality of items, (see [0057] discloses, “The present invention is a computerized Emergency medical data reference system equipped with multiple components . Data of the system is identity - restricted , and requires physical biometric authentication at the point - of use for access . The system of the present invention provides the mechanism for the biometric signature of an individual to be intrinsically linked to ( and facilitating the access thereof ) the medical data and identity data of that individual , including but not limited to : the individual's name , age , blood type , allergies , medical history , medical records , fam ily hereditary record history , dental records , dental charts , pharmaceutical records , lab results , radiology information , prescription information , prescription history , OTC medications , health insurance information , DNA ( if sequenced ) , and emergency contact information .”)
However, Piccini does not explicitly teach:
and wherein generating the possibility information comprises: computing a similarity degree for each of the plurality of items;
and generating the possibility information by using the similarity degree for each of the plurality of items.
However, Benini does teach:
and wherein generating the possibility information comprises: computing a similarity degree for each of the plurality of items;
and generating the possibility information by using the similarity degree for each of the plurality of items. (Col. 5 lines 13-66 discloses, computing a matching score for each of the biometric information which includes a database of medical information with plurality of items to understand the possibility of a candidate being the target search person)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Piccini’s teachings of identifying a candidate as a search target person as previously cited with Benini’s explicit teaching of identifying a plurality of candidates to narrow to the search target person and indicating this possibility as previously cited, the motivation being Piccini discloses having difficulty identifying a plural number of victims from e.g. natural disasters and more accurately identifying in real time the identification of an individual to prevent fraud and provide life saving treatments for example(see [0003] and [0032]-[0035]) therefore it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art to combine with Benini to ensure an accurate and efficient manner of identifying a person from a list of possible people utilizing matching scores and decreases resources needed by ranking a list to allow for final review and confirmation that said person is identified correctly even with what could be other close matches to provide care and treatment in a timely manner for example.
As per claim 2, Piccini does not teach:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein selecting the candidate comprises selecting a plurality of the candidates, the operations further comprise selecting a person who is among the plurality of candidates and who has a high possibility of being the search target person, and generating the possibility information comprises setting, as at least a part of the possibility information, information indicating the selected person.
However, Benini does teach:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein selecting the candidate comprises selecting a plurality of the candidates, the operations further comprise selecting a person who is among the plurality of candidates and who has a high possibility of being the search target person, and generating the possibility information comprises setting, as at least a part of the possibility information, information indicating the selected person. (Col. 5 lines 25-67 and Col. 6 lines 1-25 discloses, generating a ranked list from a plurality of candidates to identify a single search target and setting information regarding relationships with that person for example.)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Piccini’s teachings of identifying a candidate as a search target person as previously cited with Benini’s explicit teaching of identifying a plurality of candidates to narrow to the search target person and indicating this possibility as previously cited, the motivation being Piccini discloses having difficulty identifying a plural number of victims from e.g. natural disasters and more accurately identifying in real time the identification of an individual to prevent fraud and provide life saving treatments for example(see [0003] and [0032]-[0035]) therefore it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art to combine with Benini to ensure an accurate and efficient manner of identifying a person from a list of possible people and decreases resources needed by ranking a list to allow for final review and confirmation that said person is identified correctly even with what could be other close matches to provide care and treatment in a timely manner for example.
As per claim 3, Piccini teaches:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each of the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate includes at least one item of skeleton information, information related to a chronic disease, information related to a blood test, information related to treatment received in a past, and information related to a trace left in a body due to past treatment, and the biometric information is at least one of the face information, iris information, fingerprint information, and vein information. ([0036] discloses, The medical data of the individual may include the individual's name , age , blood type , allergies , medication ( the kind ) , and dental records — in other words , the most valuable medical information associated with the individual's most recent medical record . For example , the individual's medical condition , such as diabetes , asthma ,or a particular blood pressure or even the most recent surgery that the individual is known to have under gone , is greatly useful for the prompt emergency aid procedures and for successful diagnosis assistance.” And see [0038] discloses, “A fingerprint sensor may be particularly advantageous for identity verification and / or authentication in an electronic device , and more particularly , a portable device . Such a fingerprint sensor may be carried by the housing of a portable electronic device and may be sized to sense a fingerprint from a single - finger or multiple fingers . Biometric technology works by comparing a specific portion of the human body with the data on a file for purposes of authentication , identification , and in this particular case , medical uses . Biometric scanning devices are now available for use wirelessly , providing for mobile or stationery use by governments , the FBI , and law enforcement agencies around the world . Finally , thanks to advanced and sophisticated tech nologies including advanced secure database design and encryption , the present invention will enable all hospitals , doctors and all medical personnel , including paramedics , to use this system to rapidly attain pertinent medical data to better assist any individual . It should be noted that the biometric devices of the present invention do not actually store fingerprint images . Instead , they save a mathematical representation of the individual's biometric data ( signature ) . When a biometric device scans a fingerprint or a hand during a supervised enrollment process , only an encrypted mathematical representation of the fingerprint is stored . The algorithm cannot be reconverted to an image , so no one can duplicate the fingerprint . As a result , it is virtually impossible to duplicate the original image.” / examiner interprets the at least one item under broadest reasonable interpretation to require one of the list of items not all of the list of items )
As per claim 5, Piccini teaches:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, and generating the possibility information comprises generating the possibility information by using at least one of a time from time when medical information of the missing person is generated to current time, and information related to an age of the missing person. ([0063] discloses, “Help to find missing individuals and children via biometric identification.” And see [0047] discloses, “Additionally , another important use of the system of the present invention is that it can be used to help find a missing person such as a child . If a child gets lost or is kidnapped , it may be likely that there is no record of the child's fingerprints that are rapidly accessible.” And see [0036] discloses, “The system employs a biometric authentication and identification mechanism which links an individual's biometric scan to his or her medical data , medical history , medical records , and emergency contact information . The medical data of the individual may include the individual's name , age , blood type , allergies , medication ( the kind ) , and dental records — in other words , the most valuable medical information associated with the individual's most recent medical record.” / examiner interprets the at least one item under broadest reasonable interpretation to require one of the list of items not all of the list of items)
As per claim 7, Piccini further teaches:
The person determination apparatus according to : The person determination apparatus according to wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, and the operations further comprise using at least one of a time from time whena biometric information of the missing person is generated to current time, and information related to ([0063] discloses, “Help to find missing individuals and children via biometric identification.” And see [0047] discloses, “Additionally , another important use of the system of the present invention is that it can be used to help find a missing person such as a child . If a child gets lost or is kidnapped , it may be likely that there is no record of the child's fingerprints that are rapidly accessible.” And see [0036] discloses, “The system employs a biometric authentication and identification mechanism which links an individual's biometric scan to his or her medical data , medical history , medical records , and emergency contact information . The medical data of the individual may include the individual's name , age , blood type , allergies , medication ( the kind ) , and dental records — in other words , the most valuable medical information associated with the individual's most recent medical record.” And see [0072] discloses, “Once all of the medical data is stored in the file of the patient , linked to the individual's biometric signature , the data will remain in the system such that it is easy to access at any time for all medical authorities when there is a need.” / examiner interprets the at least one item under broadest reasonable interpretation to require one of the list of items not all of the list of items and examiner notes the age data is necessarily used as part of the stored medical data to link and reference for selecting the candidate)
However, Piccini does not teach the underlined portion:
The person determination apparatus according to : The person determination apparatus according to wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, and the operations further comprise using at least one of a time from time whenwherein selecting the candidate comprises: computing a similarity degree between the biometric information of the search target person and a biometric information stored in the candidate storage unit; and selecting the candidate associated with the biometric information whose similarity degree is equal to or higher than a reference value, and changing the reference for selecting the candidate comprises changing the reference value.
However, Benini does teach the underlined portion:
The person determination apparatus according to : The person determination apparatus according to wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, and the operations further comprise using at least one of a time from time whenwherein selecting the candidate comprises: computing a similarity degree between the biometric information of the search target person and a biometric information stored in the candidate storage unit; and selecting the candidate associated with the biometric information whose similarity degree is equal to or higher than a reference value, and changing the reference for selecting the candidate comprises changing the reference value. (Col. 5 lines 13-66 discloses, computing a matching score for each of the biometric information which includes a database of medical information with plurality of items to understand the possibility of a candidate being the target search person in relation to being higher than a threshold match and presents a ranked list or in some instances no match thus adjusting for changes to the reference of the biometric information in relation to reference value)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Piccini’s teachings with Benini’s explicit teachings for the same reasons given for claim 1.
As per claims 9, 10, 11, and 13, it is a method claim which repeats the same limitations of claims 1, 2, 3, and 5 the corresponding system claims, as a series of process steps as opposed to a collection of elements. Since the collective teachings and motivations to combine of Piccini and Benini disclose the structural elements that constitute the system of claim 1, it is respectfully submitted that they perform the underlying process steps, as well. As such, the limitations of claims 9, 10, 11, and 13 are rejected for the same reasons given above for claims 1, 2, 3, and 5.
As per claims 15, 16, 17, and 19 it is an article of manufacture claim which repeats the same limitations of claim 9, 10, 11, and 13 the corresponding method claims, as a collection of executable instructions stored on machine readable media as opposed to a series of process steps. Since the collective teachings and motivations to combine of Piccini and Benini disclose the underlying process steps that constitute the method of claim 9, 10, 11, and 13 it is respectfully submitted that they likewise disclose the executable instructions that perform the steps as well. As such, the limitations of claim 15, 16, 17, and 19 are rejected for the same reasons given above for claims 9, 10, 11, and 13.
Claims 4, 12, and 18 are rejected to under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piccini (US20220367015A1) in view of Benini (US11250078B2) in further view of Zhang (CN106897726A)
As per claim 4, Piccini and Benini do not teach:
The person determination apparatus according to : The person determination apparatus according to wherein generating the possibility information comprises performing processing for generating the possibility information when an age of the search target person meets a criterion, and the processing for generating the possibility information is not performed when the age of the search target person does not meet the criterion.
However, Zhang does teach:
The person determination apparatus according to : The person determination apparatus according to wherein generating the possibility information comprises performing processing for generating the possibility information when an age of the search target person meets a criterion, and the processing for generating the possibility information is not performed when the age of the search target person does not meet the criterion.(page 2 paras 16-17 and see Page 5 para. 4 discloses, “ In order to improve the matching efficiency, if the age range of the suspected population can be estimated, when the first client uploads the photos of the suspected population, the matching age range may also be set as shown in FIG. 4. FIG. 4 is the first The interface of the photo uploading interface of the suspicious population of the client is shown in the second schematic diagram and the matching request includes the age range of the suspected population and the similarity is matched between the photo of the suspected population and the missing population of the mulberry tree age group in the missing population database to determine the similarity N missing persons whose degree is greater than the preset threshold.” / examiner notes the art teaches searching only within the age range of the criterion thus necessarily teaching not in the age ranch negative limitation)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Piccini’s teachings of identifying a candidate as a search target person using information such as age as previously cited and Benini’s teachings of matching scores as previously cited with Zhang’s explicit teaching of the age meeting a certain criteria to be possibility information as previously cited, the motivation being Piccini discloses having difficulty identifying a plural number of victims from e.g. natural disasters and more accurately identifying in real time the identification of an individual to prevent fraud and provide life-saving treatments for example(see [0003] and [0032]-[0035]) and Benini teaches the issues with inconclusive matching due to quality data (Col. 1 lines 30-55) therefore it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art to combine with Zhang to increase the quality data considered thus increasing the accuracy of identifying a target search person and ensuring fraud is detected or care and treatment in a timely manner is given for examples.
As per claim 12, it is a method claim which repeats the same limitations of claim 4 the corresponding system claim, as a series of process steps as opposed to a collection of elements. Since the collective teaching of Piccini, Benini, and Zhang, as well as the motivations to combine, disclose the structural elements that constitute the system of claim 4, it is respectfully submitted that they perform the underlying process steps, as well. As such, the limitations of claim 12 are rejected for the same reasons given above for claim 4.
As per claim 18 it is an article of manufacture claim which repeats the same limitations of claim 12 the corresponding method claim, as a collection of executable instructions stored on machine readable media as opposed to a series of process steps. Since the collective teaching of Piccini, Benini, and Zhang, as well as the motivations to combine, disclose the underlying process steps that constitute the method of claim 12 it is respectfully submitted that they likewise disclose the executable instructions that perform the steps as well. As such, the limitations of claim 18 are rejected for the same reasons given above for claim 12.
Claims 6, 8, 14 and 20 are rejected to under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piccini (US20220367015A1) in view of Benini (US11250078B2) and in further view of Birdwell et. al (hereinafter Birdwell) (US20130131994A1)
As per claim 6, Piccini further teaches:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person…[…]… ([0063] discloses, “Help to find missing individuals and children via biometric identification.” And see [0047] discloses, “Additionally , another important use of the system of the present invention is that it can be used to help find a missing person such as a child . If a child gets lost or is kidnapped , it may be likely that there is no record of the child's fingerprints that are rapidly accessible.”)
However, Piccini and Benini do not teach the underlined portion:
The person determination apparatus according to : The person determination apparatus according to wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, the operations further comprise using a medical information of a relative of the missing person, and thereby modifying at least a part of and generating the possibility information comprises generating the possibility information by using the modified medical information of the missing person.
However, Birdwell does teach the underlined portion:
The person determination apparatus according to : The person determination apparatus according to wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, the operations further comprise using a medical information of a relative of the missing person, and thereby modifying at least a part of and generating the possibility information comprises generating the possibility information by using the modified medical information of the missing person. ([0010] discloses, “Automated decision Support for identifying a family pedigree for an individual to be identified, such as a missing person, crime, disaster or accident victim or crime perpetrator, may aid forensic Scientists to select enough and the correct family individuals related to such an individual to be identified for DNA typing. Once available family members are identified that are related to an individual to be identified such as a missing person, crime victim or perpetrator, there is provided mobile apparatus for identifying and displaying all Such individuals including family members and the individual to be identified and typed, to compare with databases of known profiles and obtain matches to verify whether an individual is indeed the individual to be identified and so related to the family pedigree. The relative importance of different combi nations of relatives to an individual to be identified and of different combinations of DNA typing technologies is used in automated decision Support to replace guess work for selecting relatives to type and DNA typing technology processes to be used for typing a given selected relative. Automated decision Support for selecting family relatives to a missing person maximizes the relative likelihood of obtaining a high prob ability of obtaining a correct match between an individual to be identified Such as a missing person and a family that may be related to the individual to be identified…[…]…The output of the process may be a pedigree likelihood ratio (PLR) based on the totality of selected multiple relatives DNA profiles or a mixture deconVolution or the like Such that an unknown individual can become known, and may use one or more of the several DNA technologies mentioned above.” And see[0082]-[0083]/ examiner interprets updating the medical information under BRI as any medical information such as the disclosed DNA information which is genetic biometric information thus collapsing the DNA information and excluding identifications based on the pedigree)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Piccini’s teachings of identifying a candidate as a search target person as previously cited and Benini’s teachings of matching scores with Birdwell’s explicit teaching of using a relatives information to update the medical information as previously cited, the motivation being Piccini discloses having difficulty identifying a plural number of victims from e.g. natural disasters and more accurately identifying in real time the identification of an individual to prevent fraud and provide life-saving treatments for example and utilizing DNA information such as the uncle example given in Piccini (see [0003] and [0032]-[0035] and [0057]) Benini teaches the issues with inconclusive matching due to quality data (Col. 1 lines 30-55) therefore it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art to combine with Birdwell to increase the quality data as DNA is broadly considered already thus explicitly considering it as in Birdwell to increase the accuracy of identifying a target search person and ensuring fraud is detected or care and treatment in a timely manner is given for examples.
As per claim 8, Piccini further teaches:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person…[…]… ([0063] discloses, “Help to find missing individuals and children via biometric identification.” And see [0047] discloses, “Additionally , another important use of the system of the present invention is that it can be used to help find a missing person such as a child . If a child gets lost or is kidnapped , it may be likely that there is no record of the child's fingerprints that are rapidly accessible.”)
However, Piccini and Benini do not teach the underlined portion:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, the operations further comprise using a biometric information of a relative of the missing person, thereby modifying biometric information of the missing person, and selecting the candidate comprises selecting the candidate by using the modified biometric information.
However, Birdwell does teach the underlined portion:
The person determination apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the search target person or the candidate is a missing person, and the operations further comprise using a biometric information of a relative of the missing person, thereby modifying biometric information of the missing person, and selecting the candidate comprises selecting the candidate by using the modified biometric information. ([0010] discloses, “Automated decision Support for identifying a family pedigree for an individual to be identified, such as a missing person, crime, disaster or accident victim or crime perpetrator, may aid forensic Scientists to select enough and the correct family individuals related to such an individual to be identified for DNA typing. Once available family members are identified that are related to an individual to be identified such as a missing person, crime victim or perpetrator, there is provided mobile apparatus for identifying and displaying all Such individuals including family members and the individual to be identified and typed, to compare with databases of known profiles and obtain matches to verify whether an individual is indeed the individual to be identified and so related to the family pedigree. The relative importance of different combi nations of relatives to an individual to be identified and of different combinations of DNA typing technologies is used in automated decision Support to replace guess work for selecting relatives to type and DNA typing technology processes to be used for typing a given selected relative. Automated decision Support for selecting family relatives to a missing person maximizes the relative likelihood of obtaining a high prob ability of obtaining a correct match between an individual to be identified Such as a missing person and a family that may be related to the individual to be identified. …[…]…The output of the process may be a pedigree likelihood ratio (PLR) based on the totality of selected multiple relatives DNA profiles or a mixture deconVolution or the like Such that an unknown individual can become known, and may use one or more of the several DNA technologies mentioned above.” / examiner interprets updating the medical information under BRI as any medical information such as the disclosed DNA information which is genetic biometric information” And see[0082]-[0083]/ examiner notes the disclosed DNA information which is genetic biometric information thus collapsing the DNA information and excluding identifications based on the pedigree)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Piccini’s teachings of identifying a candidate as a search target person as previously cited and Benini’s teachings as previously cited with Birdwell’s explicit teaching of using a relatives information to update the biometric information for the same reasons given above for claim 6.
As per claim 14, it is a method claim which repeats the same limitations of claim 8 the corresponding system claim, as a series of process steps as opposed to a collection of elements. Since the collective teaching of Piccini, Benini, and Birdwell, as well as the motivations to combine, disclose the structural elements that constitute the system of claim 8, it is respectfully submitted that they perform the underlying process steps, as well. As such, the limitations of claim 14 are rejected for the same reasons given above for claim 8.
As per claim 20 it is an article of manufacture claim which repeats the same limitations of claim 14 the corresponding method claim, as a collection of executable instructions stored on machine readable media as opposed to a series of process steps. Since the collective teaching of Piccini, Benini, and Birdwell, as well as the motivations to combine, disclose the underlying process steps that constitute the method of claim 14 it is respectfully submitted that they likewise disclose the executable instructions that perform the steps as well. As such, the limitations of claim 20 are rejected for the same reasons given above for claim 14.
Response to Arguments Regarding 35 U.S.C § 101 Rejection
The applicant argues on pages 1-4 of the submitted remarks that claims 1-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as not being directed to eligible subject matter. Applicant argues Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 101 Claims 1-20 are rejected to under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as not being directed to eligible subject matter. Applicant respectfully traverses. Independent claim 1, as amended, recites: A person determination apparatus comprising: at least one memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising: using biometric information of a search target person, and thereby selecting a candidate having a possibility of being the search target person; acquiring medical information comprising a medical history of the search target person; acquiring, from a candidate storage unit, medical information comprising a medical history of the candidate; and using the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate, and thereby generating possibility information being information corresponding to a possibility that the candidate is the search target person, wherein each of the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate includes a plurality of items, and wherein generating the possibility information comprises: computing a similarity degree for each of the plurality of items; and generating the possibility information by using the similarity degree for each of the plurality of items. Applicant argues claim 1 is patent eligible under Prong Two of the revised Step 2A of the Alice test. In Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. If the recited exception is integrated into a practical application of the exception, then the claim is eligible at Prong Two of revised Step 2A. Even if it is assumed claim 1 recites a judicial exception, which Applicant does not concede, Applicant respectfully submits that the claim is patent eligible under prong two of the revised Step 2A of the Alice test because the claim integrates the alleged judicial exception into a practical application. MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2) provides that in "Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application of that exception. If the additional elements in the claim integrate the recited exception into a practical application of the exception, then the claim is not directed to the judicial exception."13 Without any admissions and solely in an effort to expedite prosecution of the present application, amended claim 1 recites "acquiring medical information comprising a medical history of the search target person; acquiring, from a candidate storage unit, medical information comprising a medical history of the candidate...wherein each of the medical information of the search target person and the medical information of the candidate includes a plurality of items, and wherein generating the possibility information comprises: computing a similarity degree for each of the plurality of items; and generating the possibility information by using the similarity degree for each of the plurality of items." Accordingly, claim 1 integrates any possible judicial exception into a practical application of any alleged exception, and accordingly is patent eligible under Prong Two of the revised Step 2A of the Alice test. Claim 1 is patent eligible of Step 2B of the Alice test Moreover, Applicant respectfully submits that even if it is assumed the claim is directed to an abstract idea, which is not conceded, independent claim 1 recites significantly more than any allegedly abstract idea. In particular, MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(v) indicates that in evaluating Step 2B, an additional element or combination of elements "[adds] a specific limitation other than what is well- understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, or adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application," has been found to qualify as "significantly more" when recited in a claim with a judicial exception. Applicant submits that claim 1, as amended, provides an "inventive concept," and does not simply append well-understood, routine or conventional activities. For at least these reasons discussed above, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 and similarly claims 9 and 15 are directed to patent eligible subject matter. Claims