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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is response to the communication filed on May 26, 2023. Claims 1-2, 7, 10-11, 13-15, 19-20, 25-32, 59 are pending. Claims 3-6, 8-9, 12, 16-18, 21-24, 33-58, 60-62 are canceled by preliminary amendment. Note that the preliminary amendment filed on May 26, 2023 has been entered by examiner.
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 1-2, 7, 10-11, 13-15, 19-20, 25-32, 59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Regarding the claim 1, it recites creating a loop network between a central aggregating node and a set of one or more worker nodes, wherein the loop network communicatively couples the central aggregating node and the set of one or more worker nodes; receiving and broadcasting a model training request from one of the nodes in the loop network to one or more other nodes in the loop network.
The claim recited the limitation of “creating a loop network between a central aggregating node and a set of one or more worker nodes, wherein the loop network communicatively couples the central aggregating node and the set of one or more worker nodes” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. User can mentally create loop network as claimed if necessary can use pen and paper. Hence Creating limitation is a mental process. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) III, B, If a claim recites a limitation that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper, the limitation falls within the mental processes grouping, and the claim recites an abstract idea. See, e.g., Benson, 409 U.S. at 67, 65, 175 USPQ at 674-75, 674 (noting that the claimed "conversion of [binary-coded decimal] numerals to pure binary numerals can be done mentally," i.e., "as a person would do it by head and hand.").
The claim recites one additional element: receiving and broadcasting a model training request from one of the nodes in the loop network to one or more other nodes in the loop network. The receiving and broadcasting step as recited amounts to mere data gathering and outputting, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity, (see Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information)). Accordingly, even in combination, these 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. The claim is directed to the abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of receiving and broadcasting step amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The courts have recognized these functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional as they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(d) II, Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information)). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 2 is dependent on claim 1 and includes all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 2 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein the creation of the loop network is performed using a master node network and the master node network includes a set of one or more non-master nodes and a master node, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 7 is dependent on claim 2 and includes all the limitations of claim 2. Therefore, claim 7 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein each loop network is not visible with other loop networks, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 10 is dependent on claim 2 and includes all the limitations of claim 2. Therefore, claim 10 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of exchanging a central aggregating node identifier of the central aggregating node with a worker identifier from the set of one or more worker nodes; and configuring the central aggregating node and the set of one or more worker nodes to communicate with each other using the central aggregating node and worker identifiers, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 11 is dependent on claim 3 and includes all the limitations of claim 3. Therefore, claim 11 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein a node from the master node network is selected to act as a proxy for signed communications to occur between the central aggregating node and the set of one or more worker nodes, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 13 is dependent on claim 1 and includes all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 13 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein the central aggregator nodes and the worker nodes belonging to the loop network perform a training of the model, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 14 is dependent on claim 13 and includes all the limitations of claim 13. Therefore, claim 14 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein the training comprises: sending part of the model from the central aggregator node to each of the worker nodes in the set of one or more worker nodes, wherein each of the worker nodes update that part of the model; aggregating the updated model parts from each of the worker nodes in the set of one or more worker nodes in the central aggregator node; and updating the current model with the aggregated updated model parts into a new current model, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 15 is dependent on claim 14 and includes all the limitations of claim 14. Therefore, claim 15 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein the aggregation of the updated model parts from each of the worker nodes comprises: performing a secure aggregation, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 19 is dependent on claim 1 and includes all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 19 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of monitoring the master node network, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 20 is dependent on claim 19 and includes all the limitations of claim 19. Therefore, claim 20 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein the monitoring of the master nodes network comprises: gathering information from the central aggregating nodes and the set of one or more worker nodes; and processing the gathered information for presentation, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 25 is dependent on claim 1 and includes all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 25 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of pushing information from one node inside the master node network to an external device through the master node, and pushing information from an external device to one node inside the master node network through the master node, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 26 is dependent on claim 25 and includes all the limitations of claim 25. Therefore, claim 26 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein the information exchanged can be used to enable a remote access to said node in the master node network from the external device, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 27 is dependent on claim 25 and includes all the limitations of claim 25. Therefore, claim 27 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for training a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein information exchanged comprises sketches of the training data stored in the said nodes, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
As to claim 28, it has similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Hence, claim 28 is rejected under the same rational as of claim 1 above.
Claim 29 is dependent on claim 28 and includes all the limitations of claim 28. Therefore, claim 29 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for evaluate a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein the central aggregating node has a model to be evaluated and a metric to evaluate it, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 30 is dependent on claim 28 and includes all the limitations of claim 28. Therefore, claim 30 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for evaluate a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein each worker node in the set of one or more worker nodes includes evaluation data that is used to evaluate the model within the loop network, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
Claim 31 is dependent on claim 28 and includes all the limitations of claim 28. Therefore, claim 31 recites the same abstract idea of loop network for evaluate a model. The claim recites the limitations of wherein model evaluation comprises: sending the model and an evaluation metric from the central aggregating node to the worker nodes; evaluating the model on each worker node with the evaluation data and the evaluation metric; sending evaluation metric results from each worker node to the central aggregating node, which can be done mentally with or without the use of a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper) or with a generic computer in the form of insignificant extra-solution activity which is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Therefore, the limitation is a mental process.
As to claims 32 and 59, they have similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Hence, they are rejected under the same rational as of claim 1 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7, 10-11, 13-15, 19-20, 25-32, 59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (Pub. No. : US 20150363232 A1)
As to claim 1 Li teaches a method of creating a loop network that trains a model, the method comprising:
creating a loop network between a central aggregating node and a set of one or more worker nodes, wherein the loop network communicatively couples the central aggregating node and the set of one or more worker nodes (paragraphs [0024], [0058]: The system includes a master node 102 and N worker nodes indexed 1 through N, wherein the master node receives the worker-node data from the worker node and a routine “aggregate worker-node data”);
receiving and broadcasting a model training request from one of the nodes in the loop network to one or more other nodes in the loop network (paragraph [0058]: In block 1302, the query is sent from the master node to the data sources and the data sources respond by generating metric data, as described above with reference to FIG. 1A. A for-loop beginning with block 1303 repeats the operations represented by blocks 1304-1306 and 1308 for each worker node3).
As to claim 2 Li teaches wherein the creation of the loop network is performed using a master node network and the master node network includes a set of one or more non-master nodes and a master node (paragraph [0024]).
As to claim 7 Li teaches wherein each loop network is not visible with other loop networks (paragraph [0026]).
As to claim 10 Li teaches exchanging a central aggregating node identifier of the central aggregating node with a worker identifier from the set of one or more worker nodes and configuring the central aggregating node and the set of one or more worker nodes to communicate with each other using the central aggregating node and worker identifiers (paragraphs [0024]-[0028], [0058]).
As to claim 11 Li teaches wherein a node from the master node network is selected to act as a proxy for signed communications to occur between the central aggregating node and the set of one or more worker nodes (paragraph [0026]).
As to claim 13 Li teaches wherein the central aggregator nodes and the worker nodes belonging to the loop network perform a training of the model (paragraphs [0024]-[0026]).
As to claim 14 Li teaches wherein the training comprises: sending part of the model from the central aggregator node to each of the worker nodes in the set of one or more worker nodes, wherein each of the worker nodes update that part of the model, aggregating the updated model parts from each of the worker nodes in the set of one or more worker nodes in the central aggregator node; and updating the current model with the aggregated updated model parts into a new current model (paragraphs [0024]-[0028], [0058]).
As to claim 15 Li teaches wherein the aggregation of the updated model parts from each of the worker nodes comprises: performing a secure aggregation (paragraph [0062]).
As to claim 19 Li teaches monitoring the master node network (paragraph [0024]).
As to claim 20 Li teaches wherein the monitoring of the master nodes network comprises: gathering information from the central aggregating nodes and the set of one or more worker nodes and processing the gathered information for presentation (paragraphs [0024], [0051]).
As to claim 25 Li teaches pushing information from one node inside the master node network to an external device through the master node, and pushing information from an external device to one node inside the master node network through the master node (paragraphs [0024]-[0026], [0058]).
As to claim 26 Li teaches wherein the information exchanged can be used to enable a remote access to said node in the master node network from the external device (paragraph [0024]).
As to claim 27 Li teaches wherein information exchanged comprises sketches of the training data stored in the said nodes (paragraph [0024]-[0026]).
As to claim 28, it has similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Hence, claim 28 is rejected under the same rational as of claim 1 above.
As to claim 29 Li teaches wherein the central aggregating node has a model to be evaluated and a metric to evaluate it (paragraph [0058]).
As to claim 30 Li teaches wherein each worker node in the set of one or more worker nodes includes evaluation data that is used to evaluate the model within the loop network (paragraph [0058]-[0062]).
As to claim 31 Li teaches wherein model evaluation comprises: sending the model and an evaluation metric from the central aggregating node to the worker nodes; evaluating the model on each worker node with the evaluation data and the evaluation metric; sending evaluation metric results from each worker node to the central aggregating node (paragraphs [0028], [0058]-[0062]).
As to claims 32 and 59, they have similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Hence, they are rejected under the same rational as of claim 1 above.
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers or paragraphs in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in its entirety as potentially teaching of all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record, listed on form PTO-892, and not relied upon, if any, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD I UDDIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3559. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:00 am to 5:00 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, Sherief Badawi can be reached at 571-272-9782. 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.
/MD I UDDIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169