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 .
Detail Action
In the pre-liminary amendment filed on 10/25/2023, Claims 1-5 are pending and claims 1, 3, and 4 are amended and claim 5 is added.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract/ algorithm without significantly more.
Claim 1:
(Prong 2A Analysis: Whether a Claim is Directed to a Judicial Exception)
Claim 1 recites the step of:
the controller performs prediction processing of predicting a temporal change in the calculation capability available in the grid computing processing of each of the plurality of arithmetic devices on a basis of the calculation capability information and the operation status information; MPEP 2106.04(a);
This step intended to execute a prediction matching algorithm (see applicant specification p0118-p0123) which can reasonably be performed in the human mind, through observation, judgement and opinion, with the aid of pen and paper, and therefore recite a mental process.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim only recites mere instructions to apply an exception (the management system), with additional elements comprising only insignificant extra-solution activity.
(2B Analysis: Whether a claim amounts to significantly more)
Claim 1 recites the additional element of:
a controller, wherein the memory unit memorizes has stored therein calculation capability information indicating a calculation capability of each of the plurality of arithmetic devices and operation status information indicating an operation status of each of the plurality of arithmetic devices, and…
request processing of presenting, to a user who owns another arithmetic devices except for the arithmetic device predicted to be available in the grid computing processing on a basis of a result of the prediction processing among the plurality of arithmetic device, request information for prompting provision of the calculation capability of the another arithmetic device to the grid computing processing in a case where the calculation capability of the arithmetic device predicted to be available in the grid computing processing among the plurality of arithmetic devices is insufficient; MPEP 2106.05(d);
amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Further, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 2:
(Prong 2A Analysis: Whether a Claim is Directed to a Judicial Exception)
Claim 2 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 2 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (the management system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
(2B Analysis: Whether a claim amounts to significantly more)
Claim 2 recites the additional element of:
wherein the request information includes incentive information indicating an incentive given to the user who owns another arithmetic device by providing the calculation capability of another arithmetic device to the grid computing processing; MPEP 2106.5(d);
amount to is merely an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment and/or amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 2 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claim 3:
(Prong 2A Analysis: Whether a Claim is Directed to a Judicial Exception)
Claim 3 is dependent on claim 1, and therefore inherits the same judicial exception recited in claim 1.
The judicial exceptions recited in claims 3 and 1 are not integrated into a practical application because the recited additional elements comprise only mere instructions to apply an exception (the management system) and insignificant extra-solution activity.
(2B Analysis: Whether a claim amounts to significantly more)
Claim 3 recites the additional element of:
wherein the request information includes guidance information for guiding a state of the another arithmetic device to a state of being available in the grid computing processing; MPEP 2106.5(d);
amount to is merely an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment and/or amount to insignificant extra-solution activity of mere data outputting, and are additionally well-understood, routine or conventional activities for storing data. Additionally, these additional elements merely recite using computing components in their ordinary capacity to store data that is a result of the recited mental process, and thus can be considered mere instructions to apply an exception. These additional elements of insignificant extra-solution activity and mere instructions to apply recited in claim 3 are not indicative of integration into a practical application. Even when considered in combination with the additional elements of claim 1, the additional elements do not provide an inventive concept, thus the claim is not eligible.
Claims 4 and 5 are directed to a management method comprise the steps which the at least one process platform of the management system of claims 1 and 3 are configured to perform. Claims 4 and 5 recite the same limitations as claims 1 and 3, respectively; therefore, claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of a method without significantly more for the same reasons presented with respect to claims 1 and 3. See above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
18/288,187
Higuchi US 2020/0313959 in view of Ucar US 11,983,005
Claim 1
A management system that manages grid computing processing of causing an arithmetic device that is available among a plurality of arithmetic devices each of which is owned by a user, is mounted on a vehicle, enters an operation state when the vehicle is traveling, and enters a stop state when a power supply of the vehicle is turned off, to process job data, the management system comprising:
Higuchi teaches Fig. 1A-1F; Fig. 3-Fig. 6B;
Higuchi p0039-p0118;
Higuchi p0151-p0185;
a memory; and
a controller,
wherein the memory unit memorizes has stored therein calculation capability information indicating a calculation capability of each of the plurality of arithmetic devices and operation status information indicating an operation status of each of the plurality of arithmetic devices, and
Higuchi p0039-p0118;
Higuchi p0151-p0185;
the controller performs prediction processing of predicting a temporal change in the calculation capability available in the grid computing processing of each of the plurality of arithmetic devices on a basis of the calculation capability information and the operation status information, and
Higuchi p0039-p0118;
request processing of presenting, to a user who owns another arithmetic devices except for the arithmetic device predicted to be available in the grid computing processing on a basis of a result of the prediction processing among the plurality of arithmetic device, request information for prompting provision of the calculation capability of the another arithmetic device to the grid computing processing in a case where the calculation capability of the arithmetic device predicted to be available in the grid computing processing among the plurality of arithmetic devices is insufficient.
Higuchi Fig. 4A-Fig. 4B; p0154-p0164;
Ucar teaches presenting available on device with network to user in a user interface p0188;
It would have been obvious at the time of the invention for a person ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to include Ucar’s teaching with Higuchi’s method in order to allow user to view available resources.
Claim 2
The management system according to claim 1, wherein the request information includes incentive information indicating an incentive given to the user who owns the another arithmetic device by providing the calculation capability of the another arithmetic device to the grid computing processing.
Higuchi teaches Fig. 1A-1F; Fig. 3-Fig. 6B;
Higuchi p0039-p0118;
Higuchi p0151-p0185;
Claim 3
The management system according to claim 1, wherein the request information includes guidance information for guiding a state of the another arithmetic device to a state of being available in the grid computing processing.
Higuchi teaches Fig. 1A-1F; Fig. 3-Fig. 6B;
Higuchi p0039-p0118;
Higuchi p0151-p0185;
As per claims 4 and 5, they are rejected under the same rationale as claims 1 and 3. See rejection above.
Related Prior Art
Here is a list of references relates to Vehicle cloud computing:
Dagan et al. US 2021/0061306: Systems and Methods for Identifying Potential Communication Impediments.
Rosas Bustos et al. US 2022/0210165: Systems and Method of Creating and Operating a Cloudless Infrastructure of Computing Device.
Gusikhin US 11/720,398: Harvesting Vehicle Hardware Accelerators and GPU Computing Capabilities when Idle.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PENG KE whose telephone number is (571)272-4062. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-5:00.
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, Kevin Young can be reached at (571) 270-3180. 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.
PENG KE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2194
/PENG KE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2194
Prosecution Insights