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 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 2–5 recite a method or system and therefore fall within the statutory categories of process or machine, respectively.
Step 2A, Prong One
Claims 2–5 recite an abstract idea including mental processes and mathematical concepts.
Claim 2 recites: vehicle time-series information comprising first data having a relatively high degree of influence on a temporal change and second data having a lower degree of influence, arranging at least one row of the first data within each set of rows corresponding to a coefficient and arranging the second data in the remaining rows, and performing a convolution operation on the resulting matrix. These limitations recite evaluating and classifying information according to its relative significance, organizing the information according to specified rules, and mathematically processing the resulting matrix. Evaluating, classifying, and organizing information encompass mental processes, while the matrix and convolution operations additionally recite mathematical concepts.
Claims 3–5 incorporate substantially the same abstract information: evaluation, organization, and mathematical processing. Claims 3 and 5 further specify that the information is used to estimate deterioration of a vehicle power-storage device and that the first data includes voltage-related data. These limitations further specify the particular information being evaluated and the result of the analysis and do not remove the recited abstract idea.
Accordingly, claims 2–5 recite a judicial exception.
Step 2A, Prong Two
The claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
For claims 2 and 3, the convolutional neural network applies the recited information organization and mathematical processing to vehicle information to estimate a temporal change, including, in claim 3, deterioration of a power-storage device. The claimed arrangement does not improve the operation of the computer or convolutional neural network itself, which as explained in the Specification at paragraph [0046], is executed in the same manner as in a conventional convolutional neural network. The references to the analysis of vehicle information, battery deterioration, and voltage-related information, merely limits the abstract idea to a particular field of use.
Claims 4 and 5 additionally recite a control unit mounted on the vehicle that acquires and transmits vehicle information and a server outside the vehicle that receives and processes the information. The control unit’s acquisition and transmission of the information merely supplies the information used in the abstract analysis, while the server implements that analysis. These limitations do not improve the operation of the vehicle, control unit, server, communications technology, or convolutional neural network and do not otherwise meaningfully apply the resulting estimate to control or modify a physical device. Claim 5’s additional limitation to estimating deterioration of a power-storage device using voltage-related data specifies the subject matter of the information and analysis without a practical application
Considering each claim as a whole, the additional elements therefore do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Accordingly, claims 2–5 are directed to the abstract idea.
Step 2B
The additional elements, individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
For claims 2 and 3, the additional convolutional neural network performs the convolution operation on the particularly arranged information. The Specification expressly states at paragraph [0046] that the convolution operation is executed in the same manner as in a conventional convolutional neural network, thereby supporting that this additional computer implementation is well-understood, routine, and conventional. The vehicle, power-storage-device, and voltage limitations merely limit the information being analyzed and the subject of the resulting estimate.
For claims 4 and 5, the additional control unit acquires and transmits the vehicle information and the server receives and processes that information. These elements perform data acquisition, transmission, and computer processing attendant to carrying out the abstract information-analysis scheme and, individually and in combination with the other limitations, do not provide an inventive concept that transforms the judicial exception into patent-eligible subject matter. The claimed arrangement of the first and second data does not independently provide significantly more because that arrangement forms part of the abstract information evaluation and organization identified above.
Accordingly, claims 2–5, considered individually and as ordered combinations, do not recite significantly more than the judicial exception and are therefore ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Accordingly, claims 2–5 recite a judicial exception.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Julian D Huffman whose telephone number is (571)272-2147. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9am-6pm.
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, Group Director Andrea Wellington can be reached at (571)272-4483. 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.
JULIAN D. HUFFMAN
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights