DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites “A knowledge management system, comprising: a server coupled to the electronic device, comprising: a data model configured to generate a plurality of activity data nodes according to the target input data and source data; an inspection item model configured to calculate the activity data nodes according to standard data to generate at least one inspection result; an execution model configured to execute a package operation according to the at least one inspection result to generate a solution task; and a control and decision model configured to calculate the application input data based on the solution task to generate a feedback result to the electronic device”, which falls under Mathematical Calculations of abstract ideas (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) (I) C.
The claim does not integrate the abstract ideal into a practical application. The claim includes additional limitations includes: an electronic device configured to execute an interface module to obtain target input data and application input data; a server coupled to the electronic device. These limitations are recited at a high level of generality and amount to mere data gathering which is a form of insignificant extra solution activity (MPEP 216.05(g)).
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As explained previously, the generically recited server, electronic device is at best equivalent of merely adding the words “apply it” to the judicial exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims also recite other additional elements as shown above. These additional elements are mere data gathering that is recited at a high level of generality, and, as disclosed in the specification, is also well-known. This limitation therefore remains insignificant extra-solution activity even upon reconsideration. Thus, limitation (a) does not amount to significantly more. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. The claim is not eligible.
Claim 8 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claim 1 above.
Claims 2-7 and 9-14 are also affected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 are allowed over prior arts.
Madiya et al (US 2024/0264897) teaches, see figures 3-5, abstract: The processor detects an application issue at a network node receives a first set of data objects associated with the application issue occurring at the first timestamp. The processor receives a second set of data objects associated with the application issue occurring at the second timestamp. The processor determines a change between a first set of the data objects and a second set of data objects. The processor identifies an issue pattern represents an operation change of the application by a machine learning model. The processor processes the issue pattern with application information through a neural network to determine a series of executable operations associated with the application issue. The processor deploys the series of the executable operations to solve the application issue to prevent a failure operation of the application.
Durvasula et al (US 11,481,553) teach, see abstract, a computing system processing user inputs, codified knowledge management information and engine data using a trained machine learning model to generate a living document.
Shinn et al (WO 2018/187712) teach, see figure 1, abstract: An artificial intelligence problem is solved using an artificial intelligence memory graph data structure and a lexical database to identify supporting knowledge. A natural language input is received and classified into components. A starting node of an artificial intelligence memory graph data structure, which comprises one or more data nodes, is selected to begin a search for one or more supporting knowledge data nodes associated with the classified components. Starting at the starting node, the artificial intelligence memory graph data structure is searched using a lexical database to identify the one or more supporting knowledge data nodes. An artificial intelligence problem is identified and solved using the one or more identified supporting knowledge data nodes of the artificial intelligence memory graph data structure.
Goldthorpe et al (WO 03/056477) teach, see abstract, The present invention is a method, system, and computer program product for performing systemic knowledge management in an enterprise using a computer network. A universal framework that defines the structure and representation of processes, knowledge, and knowledge interrelationships between processes in an enterprise is created. The framework is used for dynamically building a model of the enterprise in real time, said model representing the enterprise as an evolving system of interconnected processes and knowledge domains. The model is stored on an enterprise knowledge database and made available over the computer network so that it may be utilised in real time by either members of the enterprise as network users, or computer applications, for managing execution of processes, and managing knowledge about and contained within processes and systems of processes.
There’s no teaching or suggestion in the prior arts for the claimed system or method for knowledge management.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAQUAN ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-1119. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur: 7:00 am-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, Thai Tran can be reached on 571-272-7382. 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.
Email: daquan.zhao1@uspto.gov.
Phone: (571)270-1119
/DAQUAN ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484