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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the communications filed on October 1, 2025. The Applicants’ Amendment and Request for Reconsideration has been received and entered.
The amendment to the specification has been accepted and entered.
Claims 1-14 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1-9 have been amended. Claims 10-14 are newly added.
The previous rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 USC 112(a) has been withdrawn.
The previous rejection of claims 1-8 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ amendments necessitated any new grounds of rejection.
The previous rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 USC 112(a) has been withdrawn in view of Applicants’ amendments.
The previous rejection of claims 1-8 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn in view of Applicants’ amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1-14: Claim 1 recites “the second expression group includes a plurality of second phrases/words that indicate a flavor or aroma of the respective object in the record.” It is unclear if the “flavor or aroma of the respective object in the record” is intended to be the same flavor or aroma that was recited in the first expression group. In other words, are the flavors/aromas in the second expression group necessarily the same as those in the first expression group? If so, then it is unclear how the second expression group differs from the first expression group. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting that the second expression group is different from the first expression group and is interpreting this portion of claim 1 as reciting “the second expression group includes a plurality of second phrases/words that indicate a second flavor or aroma of the respective object in the record.”
Further, claim 1 recites “the strength of each phrase/word.” This limitation is unclear. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the strength.” Further, it is unclear what is meant by “the strength” of each phrase/word. Is this referring to an association between each phrase/word with the respective object, to a correlation between each phrase/word and the respective object, a ranking, or something else? Further, is this strength obtained from the corresponding record or from somewhere else? For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting the strength of each phrase/word as referring to its applicability to the respective object.
Further, claim 1 recites “each given first phrase/word.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for “each given.” For purposes of examination, the Examiner is assigning little patentable weight to “given.”
Further, claim 1 recites “the value that indicates the strength”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the value.” For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting “the value” as “the strength.”
Claims 2-7 and 10-14 inherit the deficiencies of claim 1.
Claims 8-9 are rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 5: Claim 5 recites “wherein processor.” It is unclear if this is intended to be the same processor that was previously recited. For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting them as being the same and is interpreting this portion of claim 5 as reciting “wherein the processor.”
Claim 10: Claim 10 recites “wherein each of the objects.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the objects.” For purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting this portion of claim 10 as reciting “wherein each respective object is.”
Claim 14: Claim 14 recites “wherein each of the respective values that indicates a strength of a correlation between the respective object of the record and each of the first phrases/words of the first category and of the second category.” This limitation is unclear. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the respective values.” Further, it is unclear what is meant by “a strength of the correlation.” Is this intended to be the same strength that was previously recited in claim 1? Further, there is insufficient antecedent basis for “the correlation. “ For purpose of examination, the Examiner is interpreting this portion of claim 14 as reciting “wherein each of the respective values is a non-negative integer.”
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
In the event the claims are amended, they will be subject to further examination.
With respect to claim 1, the prior art of record, alone or combined, neither anticipates nor renders obvious an information processing device comprising: a processor configured to: obtain a record from a database having records, each respective record being for a respective object, and each respective record including a first expression group and a second expression group recorded in association with each other, wherein the first expression group includes a plurality of first phrases/words that indicate a flavor or aroma of the respective object in the record, the first phrases/words being classified into categories including a first category and a second category, and each first phrase/word of the second category being associated with a respective phrase/word of the first category, the second expression group includes a plurality of second phrases/words that indicate a flavor or aroma of the respective object in the record, and each record includes a respective value that indicates a strength of a correlation between the respective object of the record and each of the first phrases/words of the first category and the second category; control a display to display, on a map, a plurality of the first phrases/words that indicate the flavor or aroma of a first object obtained from the first expression group recorded in the database, each first phrase/word of the plurality of the first phrases/words relating to the first object, wherein each of the first phrases/words of the first category corresponds to an axis in the map, the strength of each phrase/word contained in the first category of the plurality of the first phrases/words is depicted by a size of a respective area in relation to the corresponding axis in the map, each given first phrase/word of the second category is superimposed on the area corresponding to the first phrase/word of the first category that is associated with the given first phrase/word of the second category, each given first phrase/word of the second category being positioned according to the value that indicates the strength of the given first phrase/word of the second category; receive, on the map, a selection of phrases/words, from among the displayed plurality of the first phrases/words, corresponding to a flavor or an aroma perceived by a user when using the first object; control the display means to display the second phrases/words recorded in the database and obtained from the second expression group corresponding to the selected first phrases/words; and control the display to display information related to a second object recorded in the database in association with the selected first phrases/words or the displayed second phrases/words.
With respect to claims 8-9, the prior art of record, alone or combined, neither anticipates nor renders obvious a method and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium reciting similar limitations.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNE MARIE GEORGALAS whose telephone number is (571)270-1258 E.S.T.. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached on 571-272-6764. 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.
/Anne M Georgalas/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689