DETAILED ACTION
Notice to Applicant
The following is a FINAL Office action upon examination of application number 18/282,799 filed on 09/19/2023. Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 14 are pending in this application, and have been examined on the merits discussed below.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Application 18/282,799 filed 09/19/2023 is a National Stage entry of PCT/CN2022/094958, International Filing Date: 05/25/2022, and claims foreign priority to 202110817865.7, filed 07/20/2021.
Response to Amendment
In the response filed July 24, 2025, Applicant amended claims 1, 4, and 6-11, and cancelled claims 5, 12, and 13. No new claims were presented for examination.
Applicant cancelled claims 12 and 13. Accordingly, the Claim Interpretation of claims 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is removed.
Applicant's amendments to the claim 10 are hereby acknowledged. The amendments are sufficient to overcome the previously issued claim objection; accordingly, this objection has been removed.
Applicant cancelled claims 12 and 13; accordingly the previously issued rejection of claims 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) has been withdrawn.
Applicant's amendments to the claims are hereby acknowledged. The amendments are sufficient to overcome the previously issued claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b); accordingly, this rejection has been withdrawn. However, a new ground of rejection is presented in light of the claim amendments.
Applicant's amendments to the claims are hereby acknowledged. The amendments are not sufficient to overcome the previously issued claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101; accordingly, this rejection has been maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 24, 2025, have been fully considered.
Applicant submits “Claims 5-6 are allowable over the prior art of record. Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of their respective base claim and any intervening claims. In reply, Claim 1 has been amended to include patentable subject matter recited in Claim 5, and “the method applied in a liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus, the liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus is connected to a mobile terminal and a storage apparatus”. Suh fails to disclose at least such a feature. Rejection thereto is respectfully traversed. Issuance thereto is respectfully requested.” [Applicant’s Remarks, 07/24/2025, page 7]
In response to Applicant’s arguments, it is noted that Applicant’s amendments to claim 1 are deemed sufficient to overcome the §103 rejection of claim 1. Accordingly, this rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant submits “Applicant respectfully submits that the amended claim 1 is directed to a liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus, the liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus is connected to a mobile terminal and a storage apparatus, and the liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus is configured to receive an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of a liquor bottle.” [Applicant’s Remarks, 07/24/2025, pages 7-8]
Applicant has not presented specific arguments against the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection raised in the previous Office action. Accordingly, the amendments are believed to be fully addressed via the updated rejection set forth in the instant Office action.
Even assuming arguendo that the statement “Applicant respectfully submits that the amended claim 1 is directed to a liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus, the liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus is connected to a mobile terminal and a storage apparatus, and the liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus is configured to receive an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of a liquor bottle” intended to argue that the claims are eligible by integrating the judicial exception into a practical application, this argument is found unpersuasive. Under Step 2A Prong Two of the eligibility inquiry, any additional elements are evaluated individually and in combination to determine whether they integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, with consideration of the following exemplary considerations that may be indicative of a practical application: an additional element that reflects an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, applying the exception with a particular machine, applying the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, effecting a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing, and applying or using the judicial exception some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
In this instance, the additional elements recited in exemplary claim 1 include: a liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus, a mobile terminal, a storage apparatus, a preset regional feature database, and machine learning. These elements have been considered individually and in combination, however these computing elements amount to using a generic computer programmed with computer-executable instructions/software to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), which merely serves to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, which is not sufficient to amount to a practical application, as noted in MPEP 2106. See also MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.05(h). Furthermore, these additional elements fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, fail to apply the exception with a particular machine, fail to apply the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, fail to effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing, and fail to apply/use the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
The Examiner emphasizes that nowhere in Applicant’s Specification is there any discussion or suggestion that the problem or solution is a technical one, nor is there even a hint of any contemplated improvement to technology. It is not clear how the claimed limitations provide an actual improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment evident in the claims. The Applicant’s claims do not adequately explain how the additional elements of the claim integrate to add any meaningful limits on the abstract idea. At the most, the claimed invention seems to provide improvement beneficial to the end users. The focus of the claims of the instant application is not on such an improvement in computers as tools, but on certain independently abstract ideas that use computers as tools. Even reviewing the Applicant’s Specification (which describes the hardware and software), it is not made clear how the hardware and software result in an improvement to the technology or hardware itself, etc. The claimed invention does not provide an improvement to another technology/technical field or the functioning of the computer itself. Applicant's invention is directed towards providing business solutions to business problems rather than providing technical solutions to technical problems; thus, the claimed invention does not provide an improvement to another technology/technical field or the functioning of the computer itself. The Examiner further points out there is no actual improvement to another technology or technical field, no improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, and no meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment evident in the claims.
Lastly, it is noted that Applicant’s claims are devoid of any discernible change, transformation, or improvement to a computer (software or hardware) or any existing technology. Applicant has not shown that any specific technological improvement is achieved within the scope of the claims. It bears emphasis that no apparatus, mobile terminal, database, or technological elements are modified or improved upon in any discernible manner. Instead, the result produced by the claims is simply information including a regional attribute, which is not a technical result or improvement thereof. For the reasons above, this argument is found unpersuasive.
13. Applicant’s remaining arguments either logically depend from the above-rejected arguments, in which case they too are unpersuasive for the reasons set forth above, or they are directed to features which have been newly added via amendment. Therefore, this is now the Examiner's first opportunity to consider these limitations and as such any arguments regarding these limitations would be inappropriate since they have not yet been examined. A full rejection of these limitations will be presented later in this Office Action.
Claim Objections
14. Claims 1, 4, 6-7, and 10-11 are objected to because the following informalities: grammatical errors.
Claim 1 was amended to recite “receiving an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of a liquor bottle; obtaining a liquor cellar information according to the liquor cellar identification information; wherein the liquor cellar information at least comprises a liquor cellar number identification, a liquor degree identification of a liquor cellar, a flavor identification and a liquor cellar grade information; sending an information input page to the mobile terminal according to the upload request; receiving a bartending scheme information and a bartending video information sent by the mobile terminal, the bartending scheme information and the bartending video information inputted through the information input page of a client;…obtaining a regional information of the mobile terminal; matching words in the regional information of the mobile terminal with regional features in a preset regional feature database to determine a second key word in the bartending video information; acting the first key word and the second key words as text key words of the bartending video information…” Claim 1 should recite “receiving an upload request and liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of a liquor bottle; obtaining liquor cellar information according to the liquor cellar identification information; wherein the liquor cellar information at least comprises a liquor cellar number identification, a liquor degree identification of a liquor cellar, a flavor identification and liquor cellar grade information; sending an information input page to the mobile terminal according to the upload request; receiving bartending scheme information and bartending video information sent by the mobile terminal, the bartending scheme information and the bartending video information inputted through the information input page of a client;…obtaining regional information of the mobile terminal; matching words in the regional information of the mobile terminal with regional features in a preset regional feature database to determine a second key word in the bartending video information; acting the first key word and the second key words as text key words of the bartending video information…” since “information” is an uncountable noun. Therefore, it cannot be preceded by “a”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 was amended to recite “A liquor manufacturing sharing method according to claim 1 characterized in that, before receiving the upload request and the liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: receiving a booking information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle; wherein the booking information comprises a required quantity and a type of liquor cellar.” Claim 4 should read “A liquor manufacturing sharing method according to claim 1 characterized in that, before receiving the upload request and the liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: receiving booking information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle; wherein the booking information comprises a required quantity and a type of liquor cellar” since “information” is an uncountable noun. Therefore, it cannot be preceded by “a”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 was amended to recite “characterized in that, after sending of the bartending file, the method comprises: obtaining a historical behavior object of a mobile terminal user, and using the historical behavior object to determine an user behavior feature vector of the mobile terminal user; obtaining behavioral users of multiple selected objects, and use the behavioral users of each selected object to determine a object behavior feature vector of the selected object…” Claim 6 should recite “characterized in that, after sending of the bartending file, the method comprises: obtaining a historical behavior object of a mobile terminal user, and using the historical behavior object to determine a user behavior feature vector of the mobile terminal user; obtaining behavioral users of multiple selected objects, and use the behavioral users of each selected object to determine an object behavior feature vector of the selected object…”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 was amended to recite “receiving a cellar evaluation information entered by the mobile terminal on the information input page; grading or optimizing the cellar according to the cellar evaluation information and demand amount; sorting the grade of the cellar, to obtain the grade ranking of the cellar.” Claim 7 should recite “receiving cellar evaluation information entered by the mobile terminal on the information input page; grading or optimizing the cellar according to the cellar evaluation information and demand amount; sorting the grade of the cellar, to obtain the grade ranking of the cellar” since “information” is an uncountable noun. Therefore, it cannot be preceded by “a”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 was amended to recite “before receiving an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: receiving a booking information sent by the mobile terminal according to a type of the liquor cellar; wherein, the booking information is a demand amount corresponding to the type of the liquor cellar.” Claim 7 should recite “before receiving an upload request and liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: receiving booking information sent by the mobile terminal according to a type of the liquor cellar; wherein, the booking information is a demand amount corresponding to the type of the liquor cellar” since “information” is an uncountable noun. Therefore, it cannot be preceded by “a”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 was amended to recite “obtaining a cellar information corresponding to each bottle in a bartending scheme according to the bartending document; generating a booking information based on the liquor cellar information corresponding to each bottle; assembling liquor components according to the booking information.” Claim 11 should recite “obtaining a cellar information corresponding to each bottle in a bartending scheme according to the bartending document; generating a booking information based on the liquor cellar information corresponding to each bottle; assembling liquor components according to the booking information” since “information” is an uncountable noun. Therefore, it cannot be preceded by “a”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
15. 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.
16. Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
17. Claim 1 was amended to recite “a name of the iconic place contained in the region,” and “a name of the marking agency contained in the region.” The phrases “the iconic place” and “the marking agency” lack antecedent basis and therefore render the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
All claims dependent from above rejected claims are also rejected due to dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
18. 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.
19. Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
20. Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The eligibility analysis in support of these findings is provided below, in accordance with MPEP 2106.
With respect to Step 1 of the eligibility inquiry (as explained in MPEP 2106), it is first noted that the method (claims 1-4 and 6-11) and server (claim 14) are directed to at least one potentially eligible category of subject matter (i.e., process and machine, respectively). Thus, Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility test for claims 1-4, 6-11, and 14 is satisfied.
With respect to Step 2A Prong One, it is next noted that the claims recite an abstract idea that falls into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” abstract idea set forth in MPEP 2106 because the claims recite steps for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions (e.g., following rules or instructions), and steps that can be performed in the human mind (including observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), and therefore fall under the “Mental Processes” abstract idea grouping. With respect to independent claim 1, the limitations reciting the abstract idea are indicated in bold below: receiving an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of a liquor bottle; obtaining a liquor cellar information according to the liquor cellar identification information; wherein the liquor cellar information at least comprises a liquor cellar number identification, a liquor degree identification of a liquor cellar, a flavor identification and a liquor cellar grade information; sending an information input page to the mobile terminal according to the upload request; receiving a bartending scheme information and a bartending video information sent by the mobile terminal, the bartending scheme information and the bartending video information inputted through the information input page of a client; generating a bartending file based on the bartending scheme information, the liquor cellar information and the bartending video information; sending the bartending file to the storage apparatus, so that different users can obtain the bartending file from the storage apparatus; obtaining a text word set according to a word segmentation processing of the bartending video information; determining a first key word in the text word set according to words of the text word set; obtaining a regional information of the mobile terminal; matching words in the regional information of the mobile terminal with regional features in a preset regional feature database to determine a second key word in the bartending video information; acting the first key word and the second key words as text key words of the bartending video information; determining a feature word vector sequence used to represent the bartending video information, according to the text key words of the bartending video information, and matching the bartending file according to the feature word vector sequence and the regional information of the mobile terminal; processing regional recognition to the feature word vector sequence based on a regional recognition model to obtain a regional attribute of the bartending video information; wherein the region recognition model is determined by machine learning based on training text and a region attribute label corresponding to the training text; the regional features comprise at least one selected from a group consisting of a geographical name of a region, a name of the iconic place contained in the region, and a name of the marking agency contained in the region. These steps describe managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions (e.g., social activities, following rules or instructions) and are part of the abstract idea falling under “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” and steps that can be performed in the human mind, and therefore fall under the “Mental Processes” abstract idea grouping.
Because the above-noted limitations recite steps falling within the “Certain methods of organizing human activity” abstract idea grouping and the “Mental Processes” abstract idea grouping, they have been determined to recite at least one abstract idea when evaluated under Step 2A Prong One of the eligibility inquiry. combination, under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B below. Claim 14 recites similar limitations as those discussed above and is therefore found to recite the same or substantially the same abstract ideas as claim 1.
With respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. With respect to claims 1 and 14, the additional elements are: a liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus, a mobile terminal, a storage apparatus, a preset regional feature database, and machine learning (claim 1), a processor, a memory, at least one instruction or at least one program is stored (claim 14). These additional elements have been evaluated, but fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they amount to using generic computing elements or computer-executable instructions (software) to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), and merely serve to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and 2106.05(h). Even if the “receiving” and “obtaining” steps are evaluated as additional elements, these steps amount at most to insignificant extra-solution data gathering activity, which is not indicative of a practical application, as noted in MPEP 2106.05(g). Similarly, the “sending” step amounts to insignificant post-solution activity for transmitting data, which is not sufficient to amount to a practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
In addition, these limitations fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field, fail to apply the exception with a particular machine, fail to apply the judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, fail to effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing, and fail to apply/use the abstract idea in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, because the Step 2A Prong One and Prong Two analysis resulted in the conclusion that the claims are directed to an abstract idea, additional analysis under Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry must be conducted in order to determine whether any claim element or combination of elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With respect to Step 2B of the eligibility inquiry, it has been determined that the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. With respect to claims 1 and 14, the additional elements are: a liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus, a mobile terminal, a storage apparatus, a preset regional feature database, and machine learning (claim 1), a processor, a memory, at least one instruction or at least one program is stored (claim 14). These elements have been considered individually and in combination, but fail to add significantly more to the claims because they amount to using generic computing elements or instructions (software) to perform the abstract idea, similar to adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), and merely serve to link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Notably, Applicant’s Specification describes that generic computer devices that may be used to implement the invention, which cover virtually any computing device under the sun (Specification at paragraph [0041]). Accordingly, the generic computer involvement in performing the claim steps merely serves to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, which does not add significantly more to the claim. See, e.g., Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. 2347, 110 USPQ2d 1976.).
With respect to the “receiving,” “obtaining” and “sending” steps, even if considered as additional elements, these steps at most amount to receiving/transmitting data, which has been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and thus insufficient to add significantly more to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
Even if the machine learning was evaluated as elements beyond software/code for a generic computer to execute, it is noted that that the claimed use of machine learning is recited at a high level of generality these elements amount to well-understood, routine, and conventional activity in the art, which fails to add significantly more to the claims. See, e.g., Magdon-Ismail et al., US 2009/0055270 (paragraph 39: “Both local and central engines may incorporate analysis techniques, such as artificial intelligence, machine learning and other techniques, which are well known in the art”). See also, Anders et al., US 2020/0020015 (paragraph 101: “inferences may be performed by any combination of means known in the art, such as by pattern-matching, text analytics, semantic analytics, statistical methods, artificial intelligence, Bayesian analysis, machine learning, or keyword searching”).
In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea or that, as an ordered combination, amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Dependent claims 2-4 and 6-11 recite the same abstract idea as recited in the independent claim, and when evaluated under Step 2A Prong One are found to merely recite details that serve to narrow the same abstract idea recited in the independent claims accompanied by the same generic computing elements or software as those addressed above in the discussion of the independent claims, which is not sufficient to amount to a practical application or add significantly more, or other additional elements that fail to amount to a practical application or add significantly more, as noted above. In particular, dependent claims 2-4 and 6-11 recite “characterized in that, the bartending scheme information comprises at least a bartending name; after generating the bartending file based on the bartending scheme information, the liquor cellar information and the bartending video information, the method also comprises: obtaining the bartending name in the bartending scheme information; naming the bartending file according to the bartending name,” “characterized in that, before sending the bartending file, it also comprises: obtaining a name of the bartending file, and extracting a keyword of the name of the bartending file; labeling the keyword as an index name of the bartending file,” “characterized in that, before receiving the upload request and the liquor cellar identification information sent after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: receiving a booking information sent after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle; wherein the booking information comprises a required quantity and a type of liquor cellar,” “characterized in that, after sending of the bartending file, the method comprises: obtaining a historical behavior object of a mobile terminal user, and using the historical behavior object to determine an user behavior feature vector of the mobile terminal user; obtaining behavioral users of multiple selected objects, and use the behavioral users of each selected object to determine a object behavior feature vector of the selected object; inputting the user behavior feature vector and the object behavior feature vector of each selected object into a behavior recognition model for behavior recognition processing, and obtaining a behavior probability of the mobile terminal user towards the selected object; determining a target behavior object of the mobile terminal user from the multiple selected object based on the behavior probability of the mobile terminal user towards the selected object; wherein, the behavior recognition model comprises a prediction model based on a behavior recognition training of user behavior feature vectors, user no-behavior feature vectors and object behavior feature vectors,” “characterized in that, after receiving the booking information sent after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: receiving a cellar evaluation information entered on the information input page; grading or optimizing the cellar according to the cellar evaluation information and demand amount; sorting the grade of the cellar, to obtain the grade ranking of the cellar,” “characterized in that, after receiving the booking information sent after scanning the digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: obtaining evaluation results of different mobile terminals; according to the evaluation results, sorting a grade of the cellar and obtaining a preset cellar grade ranking; obtaining the demand amount sent, optimizing the preset cellar grade ranking according to the demand amount, and obtaining the cellar grade ranking,” “characterized in that, the bartending scheme information is generated by a drinker after bartending the liquor on the basis of the digital identification of the liquor bottle or self-experience,” “characterized in that, before receiving an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent after scanning a digital identification of the liquor bottle, the method also comprises: receiving a booking information sent according to a type of the liquor cellar; wherein, the booking information is a demand amount corresponding to the type of the liquor cellar,” “characterized in that, after generating the bartending file based on the bartending scheme information, the liquor cellar information and the bartending video information, the method comprises: receiving a booking request generated based on the bartending file; obtaining a cellar information corresponding to each bottle in a bartending scheme according to the bartending document; generating a booking information based on the liquor cellar information corresponding to each bottle; assembling liquor components according to the booking information”, however these limitations are part of the same abstract idea as addressed in the independent claims that falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” and “Mental Processes” abstract idea groupings. Accordingly, these steps are part of the same abstract idea(s) set forth in the independent claims.
Dependent claim 8 recites additional elements of different mobile terminals. However, when evaluated under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B, these additional elements do not amount to a practical application or significantly more since they merely require generic computing devices (or computer-implemented instructions/code) which as noted in the discussion of the independent claims above is not enough to render the claims as eligible.
When evaluated under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B, the additional elements do not amount to a practical application or significantly more since they merely require generic computing devices (or computer-implemented instructions/code) which as noted in the discussion of the independent claims above is not enough to render the claims as eligible.
The ordered combination of elements in the dependent claims (including the limitations inherited from the parent claim(s)) add nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Accordingly, the subject matter encompassed by the dependent claims fails to amount to a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
For more information, see MPEP 2106.
Allowable over the prior art
21. Claims 1-4, 6-11, and 14 are allowable over prior art. With respect to independent claim 1, the closest prior art, Suh et al., Li, Thomas, collectively teach features for receiving an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent by a mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of the liquor bottle; obtaining a cellar information according to the liquor cellar identification information; wherein the liquor cellar information at least comprises a liquor cellar number identification, a liquor degree identification of a liquor cellar, a flavor identification and a liquor cellar grade information; sending the information input page to the mobile terminal according to the upload request; receiving a bartending scheme information and a bartending video information sent by the mobile terminal, the bartending scheme information and the bartending video information inputted through an information input page of a client; generating a bartending file based on the bartending scheme information, the liquor cellar information and the bartending video information; sending the bartending file to a storage apparatus, so that different users can obtain the bartending file from the storage apparatus [See Office Action mailed 05/19/2025 for prior art citations pertinent to the above-noted subject matter].
However, with respect to amended independent claim 1, while Guo, Pub. No.: CN 111401461 teaches obtaining video information and DeRaedt et al., Patent No.: US 11,192,772 B1 describes allowing a user to search/view/download available beverage recipes which are available at a given location having one or more beverage dispensing devices and sharing cocktail recipes and locations (col. 16, lines 64-67 & col. 17, lines 1-23, col. 23, lines 31-43), the prior art of record does not teach obtaining a text word set according to a word segmentation processing of the bartending video information; determining a first key word in the text word set according to words of the text word set; obtaining a regional information of the mobile terminal; matching words in the regional information of the mobile terminal with regional features in a preset regional feature database to determine a second key word in the bartending video information; acting the first key word and the second key words as text key words of the bartending video information; determining a feature word vector sequence used to represent the bartending video information, according to the text key words of the bartending video information, and matching the bartending file according to the feature word vector sequence and the regional information of the mobile terminal; processing regional recognition to the feature word vector sequence based on a regional recognition model to obtain a regional attribute of the bartending video information; wherein the region recognition model is determined by machine learning based on training text and a region attribute label corresponding to the training text; the regional features comprise at least one selected from a group consisting of a geographical name of a region, a name of the iconic place contained in the region, and a name of the marking agency contained in the region
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claims are directed to allowable subject matter because the prior art of record either individually or in combination does not teach: “A liquor manufacturing sharing method, characterized in that, the method applied in a liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus, the liquor manufacturing sharing apparatus is connected to a mobile terminal and a storage apparatus, and the method comprises: receiving an upload request and a liquor cellar identification information sent by the mobile terminal after scanning a digital identification of a liquor bottle; obtaining a liquor cellar information according to the liquor cellar identification information; wherein the liquor cellar information at least comprises a liquor cellar number identification, a liquor degree identification of a liquor cellar, a flavor identification and a liquor cellar grade information; sending an information input page to the mobile terminal according to the upload request; receiving a bartending scheme information and a bartending video information sent by the mobile terminal, the bartending scheme information and the bartending video information inputted through the information input page of a client; generating a bartending file based on the bartending scheme information, the liquor cellar information and the bartending video information; sending the bartending file to the storage apparatus, so that different users can obtain the bartending file from the storage apparatus; obtaining a text word set according to a word segmentation processing of the bartending video information; determining a first key word in the text word set according to words of the text word set; obtaining a regional information of the mobile terminal; matching words in the regional information of the mobile terminal with regional features in a preset regional feature database to determine a second key word in the bartending video information; acting the first key word and the second key words as text key words of the bartending video information; determining a feature word vector sequence used to represent the bartending video information, according to the text key words of the bartending video information, and matching the bartending file according to the feature word vector sequence and the regional information of the mobile terminal; processing regional recognition to the feature word vector sequence based on a regional recognition model to obtain a regional attribute of the bartending video information; wherein the region recognition model is determined by machine learning based on training text and a region attribute label corresponding to the training text; the regional features comprise at least one selected from a group consisting of a geographical name of a region, a name of the iconic place contained in the region, and a name of the marking agency contained in the region,” as recited in amended claim 1 (and as similarly encompassed by claim 14), thus rendering claims 1-4, 6-11, and 14 as allowable over prior art. However, these claims are not allowable because they remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 101.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Clément et al., Patent No.: US 10,732,022 B2 – describes a system and method for real-time management of liquid bottles content in a bar.
Seifer et al., Pub. No.: US 2008/0275761 A1 – describes a method for storing wine industry data, consumer preference data, and inventory data for a particular type of wine in a database and using the wine industry data and consumer preference data to provide a personalized wine recommendation comprising obtaining information to identify a bottle of wine, receiving consumer preference data for the bottle of wine, searching the wine industry data based on the consumer preference data and providing a location-based wine recommendation to the consumer.
Sippel, Sigurd. "Knowledge-based recommendations for cocktail recipes." (2015) – describes a knowledge-based recommendation that is based on features such as the ingredients, the preparation, and the glassware.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARLENE GARCIA-GUERRA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3339. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30a.m.-5:00p.m. EST.
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, Brian M. Epstein can be reached on (571) 270-5389. 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.
/Darlene Garcia-Guerra/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3625