CTNF 18/332,691 CTNF 96540 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites: “A soil landslide matrix suction testing method based on soil body conductivity, comprising the following steps of: establishing an unsaturated residual soil matrix suction measurement method based on soil body conductivity: PNG media_image1.png 54 220 media_image1.png Greyscale (1) wherein in the formula, σ is soil body conductivity, σ, is saturated soil body conductivity, ψ is matrix suction, α and β are fitting parameters, and ρ is a saturation index; 2) acquiring actual measurement data of an unsaturated soil conductivity-moisture content curve measured by an indoor soil slope rainfall experiment;” 3) acquiring actual measurement data of an unsaturated soil moisture content-matric suction curve measured by an indoor soil slope rainfall experiment; (4) substituting the unsaturated soil conductivity data measured in the step 2) and the unsaturated soil matrix suction data measured in the step 3) into the formula (1) for fitting to obtain the saturation index ρ and the fitting parameters α and β; and 5) substituting the saturation index ρ and the fitting parameters α and β obtained into the formula (1) to obtain a conductivity-matric suction model of the soil body, and substituting a conductivity of an unsaturated soil body into the conductivity-matric suction model to obtain a matric suction of the soil body. The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional element”. Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (process). Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation that falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts - mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations. The steps of “establishing an unsaturated residual soil matrix suction measurement method based on soil body conductivity: PNG media_image1.png 54 220 media_image1.png Greyscale (1) wherein in the formula, σ is soil body conductivity, σ, is saturated soil body conductivity, ψ is matrix suction, α and β are fitting parameters, and ρ is a saturation index substituting the unsaturated soil conductivity data measured in the step 2) and the unsaturated soil matrix suction data measured in the step 3) into the formula (1) for fitting to obtain the saturation index ρ and the fitting parameters α and β; and 5) substituting the saturation index ρ and the fitting parameters α and β obtained into the formula (1) to obtain a conductivity-matric suction model of the soil body, and substituting a conductivity of an unsaturated soil body into the conductivity-matric suction model to obtain a matric suction of the soil body” are treated as belonging to the mathematical calculations grouping. Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. The above claims comprise the following additional elements: Claim 1: A soil landslide matrix suction testing method based on soil body conductivity, comprising the following steps of 2) acquiring actual measurement data of an unsaturated soil conductivity-moisture content curve measured by an indoor soil slope rainfall experiment; 3) acquiring actual measurement data of an unsaturated soil moisture content-matric suction curve measured by an indoor soil slope rainfall experiment . The above steps of a soil landslide matrix suction testing method based on soil body conductivity, comprising the following steps of 2) acquiring actual measurement data of an unsaturated soil conductivity-moisture content curve measured by an indoor soil slope rainfall experiment; 3) acquiring actual measurement data of an unsaturated soil moisture content-matric suction curve measured by an indoor soil slope rainfall experiment are generically recited and represent mere data gathering steps (insignificant extra-solution activity) necessary to execute the abstract idea. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B. However, the above claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (Step 2B analysis) because these additional elements/steps are well-understood and conventional in the relevant art based on the prior art of record including references in the submitted IDS (6/09/2023) by the Applicant (Li and He). The independent claims, therefore, are not patent eligible. With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-4 provide additional features/steps which are either part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims (additionally comprising mathematical process steps (Claims 2-4) or adding additional elements/steps that are not meaningful as they are recited in generality and/or not qualified as particular machine/ and/or eligible transformation and, therefore, do not reflect a practical application as well as not qualified for “significantly more” based on prior art of record. Examiner Notes with Regards to Prior Art of Record In regards to Claim 1, the claims contain allowable subject matter, once 101 matters have been addressed, because the closest prior art Li and He either singularly or in combination, fail to anticipate or render obvious, establishing an unsaturated residual soil matrix suction measurement method based on soil body conductivity: PNG media_image1.png 54 220 media_image1.png Greyscale (1) wherein in the formula, σ is soil body conductivity, σ, is saturated soil body conductivity, ψ is matrix suction, α and β are fitting parameters, and ρ is a saturation index, in combination with all other limitations in the claim as claimed and defined by applicant. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Steven Brown (US7776604) discloses a method of selecting developing particulate material for a composition comprising the particulate material and a matrix by using at least one homogeneous interaction parameter alone. Peter Buss (US20040145379) discloses a soil parameter measurement arrangement includes a capacitive based soil moisture and salinity sensor, a predetermined moisture migration medium . Franco da Encarnacao (US5857289) discloses an apparatus for determining a critical level of soil humidity for plants including an external body, a soil recipient container hermetically sealed to the external body so as to receive a soil sample. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARAH ZAAB whose telephone number is (571)272-4973. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 am - 4:30 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, Lisa Caputo can be reached on 571-272-2388 . 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. /SHARAH ZAAB/Examiner, Art Unit 2863 /LISA M CAPUTO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2863 Application/Control Number: 18/332,691 Page 2 Art Unit: 2863 Application/Control Number: 18/332,691 Page 3 Art Unit: 2863 Application/Control Number: 18/332,691 Page 4 Art Unit: 2863 Application/Control Number: 18/332,691 Page 5 Art Unit: 2863 Application/Control Number: 18/332,691 Page 6 Art Unit: 2863 Application/Control Number: 18/332,691 Page 7 Art Unit: 2863