DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/07/2026 has been entered.
3. Claims 1, 5-7, 9-14, and 17-18 are currently pending and are rejected for the reasons set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 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.
5. Claims 1, 5-7, 9-14, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
6. Analysis:
Step 1: Statutory Category?: (is the claim(s) directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?) - YES: In the instant case, claims 1, 5-7, 9-14, and 17-18 are directed to a method (i.e., process).
Regarding independent claim 1:
Step 2A - Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited?: (is the claim(s) recited a judicial exception (an abstract idea enumerated in the 2019 PEG, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon) – YES: Independent claim 1 recites the at least following limitations of “… in response to receipt of user input instructions, loading the capitalization table of the company; generating a plurality of interactive icons that are associated with the company and the related-parties for the tree diagram, wherein the interactive icons include a root node icon that is associated with the company, and a plurality of stem node icons that are each associated with a respective one of the related-party datasets; arranging the plurality of interactive icons including the root node icon and the plurality of stem node icons in the tree diagram, the tree diagram being in the form of a two-dimensional plot, wherein arranging the plurality of interactive icons includes: arranging the root node icon at an origin of the tree diagram, arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with partial owners on one side of the tree diagram, and arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with subsidiary parties on an opposite side of the tree diagram; and plotting a plurality of investment routes each connecting two interactive icons arranged in the tree diagram, wherein arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the partial owners includes: for each of the stem node icons that is associated with a direct partial owner, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in a first layer based on the importance value for each of the stem node icons that is associated with an indirect partial owner, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in a layer different from the first layer based on the importance value wherein arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the subsidiary parties includes for each of the stem node icons that is associated with a direct subsidiary party, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in another first layer based on the importance value for each of the stem node icons that is associated with an indirect subsidiary party, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in a layer different from the first layer and the another first layer based on the importance value: and wherein the interactive icons in a same layer are aligned along a first direction, and the different layers are spaced apart from one another along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction: wherein assigning an importance value to each of the stem node icons includes sorting each of the indirect partial owners into one of a number of groups based on an association with one of the direct partial owners, and assigning each of the indirect partial owners with an importance value with respect to a corresponding one of the groups; wherein assigning an importance value to each of the stem node icons further includes: assigning an importance value to the stem node icon associated with a partial owner that is a natural person to be lower than that assigned to the stem node icon associated with a partial owner that is not a natural person; for each of the partial owners that is a natural person, assigning an importance value that is positively related to the percentage of the ownership of the company to the corresponding stem node icon; for each of the partial owners that is not a natural person, assigning an importance value that is positively related to the percentage of the ownership of the company to the corresponding stem node icon; and for each of the subsidiary parties, assigning an importance value that is positively related to the percentage of the ownership by the company to the corresponding stem node icon; the method further comprising: controlling the display to display the tree diagram; in response to receipt of a first command …, … to display information associated with one of the related-parties that corresponds to the one of the interactive icons, wherein the tree diagram is initially displayed without showing the investment routes; and in response to receipt of a second command …, display one or more investment routes that involve the one of the interactive icons; and in a case where multiple interactive icons associated with a same entity are generated, selecting one of the interactive icons as a representative interactive icon for the entity, keeping the representative interactive icon in the tree diagram, and removing other interactive icons from the tree diagram; wherein a stem node icon representing a partial owner is selected as the representative interactive icon over a stem node icon representing a subsidiary party, and in a case where multiple interactive icons representing the same entity as partial owners or as subsidiary parties appear in different layers, the interactive icon appearing in the layer that is closest to the root node icon is selected as the representative interactive icon.” These recited limitations of the claim, as drafted, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas as they cover performance of the limitations in commercial interactions (including business relations for generating a tree diagram of a shareholding structure). Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application?: (is the claim(s) recited additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception) - NO: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, independent claim 1 further to the abstract idea includes additional elements of “a processor”, “an electronic device”, “an interface”, and “a display”. However, the additional elements recite generic computer components such as a computer, computing devices, a server, and/or software programing that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f). The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
2B: Claim provides an Inventive Concept?: (is the claim(s) recited additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (aka “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception) - NO: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of “a processor”, “an electronic device”, “an interface”, and “a display” evaluated individually and in combination do not amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are not more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer, or are not more than merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more - See MPEP 2106.05(f)(2). None of the additional elements taken individually or when taken as an ordered combination amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claim is patent-ineligible.
Dependent claims 5-7, 9-14, and 17-18 have been given the full two-part analysis, analyzing the additional limitations both individually and in combination. The dependent claims, when analyzed individually and in combination, are also held to be patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Dependent claim 5: simply provides further definition to “a plurality of layers of stem node icons associated with the partial owners and a plurality of layers of stem node icons associated with the subsidiary parties, relative horizontal locations of the stem node icons in each of the groups associated with the partial owners in the Nth layer” recited in independent claim 1. Simply stating that there being a plurality of layers of stem node icons associated with the partial owners and a plurality of layers of stem node icons associated with the subsidiary parties, wherein: relative horizontal locations of the stem node icons in each of the groups associated with the partial owners in the Nth layer are arranged based on the relative horizontal location of the stem node icon of the corresponding partial owners in the (N-1)th layer; relative horizontal locations of the stem node icons in each of the groups associated with the subsidiary parties on the Nth layer are arranged based on the relative horizontal location of the stem node icon of the corresponding subsidiary party in the (N-1)th layer does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 6: simply refines the abstract idea because it recites limitations (e.g., further comprising: selecting, from the first layer of stem node icons associated with the related-parties, a first reference icon to be aligned with the root node icon based on a number N of stem node icons that are present in the first layer, wherein a ceil(N/2)th stem node icon in the first layer is selected as the first reference icon, ceil(N/2) being a smallest integer that is no less than N/2; selecting, from a Kth layer of stem node icons associated with the related- parties, a Kth reference icon to be aligned with a (K-1)th reference icon, which is aligned with the root node icon, based on a number M of stem node icons that are included in a group of stem node icons which are present in the Kth layer and associated with the (K-1)th reference icon, wherein a ceil(M/2)th stem node icon in the group in the Kth layer is selected as the (K)th reference icon, ceil(M/2) being a smallest integer that is no less than M/2; and for each of the layers, arranging the horizontal locations of the stem node icons in the layer based on the importance values of the stem node icons in the layer and the reference icon for the layer), that fall under the category of organizing human activity as described above in dependent claim 5. Thus, the dependent claim does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 7: simply refines the abstract idea because it recites limitations (e.g., further comprising, after arranging the horizontal locations of the stem node icons for each of the layers: determining, for each group of stem node icons disposed in a Yth layer, an expected reference point for the corresponding stem node icon in a (Y-1)th layer; and when it is determined that the corresponding stem node icon is not at the expected reference point, shifting the corresponding stem node icon horizontally to the expected reference point), that fall under the category of organizing human activity as described above in dependent claim 6. Thus, the dependent claim does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 9: simply provides further definition to “each of the related-parties, the generating a plurality of interactive icons” recited in independent claim 1. Simply stating that each of the related-parties being one of a partial owner, a subsidiary party and an affinity party which owns a percentage of the property of a subsidiary party of the company and has a percentage of the property that is owned by a partial owner of the company, wherein: the generating a plurality of interactive icons includes generating a plurality of stem node icons that are associated with the affinity parties of the company, respectively; and the arranging the plurality of interactive icons further includes arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the affinity parties on another side of the tree diagram that is different from the one side and the opposite side of the tree diagram does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 10: simply provides further definition to “the arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the affinity parties” recited in dependent claim 9. Simply stating that wherein the arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the affinity parties includes: assigning an importance value to each of those of the stem node icons; and arranging those of the stem node icons based on the importance values in order to construct an n*n square matrix does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 11: simply provides further definition to “the assigning of the importance value to each of those of the stem node icons” recited in dependent claim 10. Simply stating that wherein the assigning of the importance value to each of those of the stem node icons includes assigning the importance value based on a sum of a number of relationships between the associated affinity party and the partial owners, and a number of relationships between the associated affinity party and the subsidiary parties does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 12: simply provides further definition to “the stem node icons associated with the affinity parties” recited in dependent claim 10. Simply stating that the stem node icons associated with the affinity parties being arranged in an M-level stack, wherein the arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the affinity parties further includes selecting a ceil(M/2)th level as a reference level to be aligned with the root node icon, ceil(M/2) being a smallest integer that is no less than M/2 does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 13: simply refines the abstract idea because it recites limitations (e.g., further comprising, after the arranging the plurality of interactive icons, for each of the interactive icons: plotting a vertical auxiliary line to the left of the interactive icon, between the interactive icon and a nearby interactive icon to the left; and plotting a horizontal auxiliary line on above the interactive icon, between the interactive icon and a nearby interactive icon on top), that fall under the category of organizing human activity as described above in dependent claim 9. Thus, the dependent claim does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 14: simply provides further definition to “the plotting a plurality of investment routes” recited in dependent claim 13. Simply stating that wherein the plotting a plurality of investment routes includes: plotting an investment route from one of the stem node icons that is associated with one of the related-parties to connect to another interactive icon that is associated with another entity partially owned by the one of the related-parties; wherein the investment route between one of the stem node icons and another of the stem node icons is plotted to start at one side of the one of the stem node icons, extend until in contact with one of the vertical auxiliary line and the horizontal auxiliary line associated with the one of the stem node icons, extend along the one of the vertical auxiliary line and the horizontal auxiliary line associated with the one of the stem node icons until in contact with one of the vertical auxiliary line and the horizontal auxiliary line associated with the another one of the stem node icons, extend along the one of the vertical auxiliary line and the horizontal auxiliary line associated with the another one of the stem node icons until in direct proximity to the other one of the stem node icons, and extend to contact the another one of the stem node icons does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 17: simply provides further definition to “in the case where multiple interactive icons representing the same entity appear in the same layer” recited in independent claim 1. Simply stating that wherein, in the case where multiple interactive icons representing the same entity appear in the same layer, the interactive icon that is farthest to the left is selected as the representative interactive icon does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application, a play interface) that results in the claim being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Dependent claim 18: simply refines the abstract idea because it recites limitations (e.g., further comprising: generating the tree diagram by operating the interface to control the electronic device), that fall under the category of organizing human activity as described above in independent claim 1. Thus, the dependent claim does not add any additional element or subject matter that provides a technological improvement (i.e., an integration into a practical application) that results in the claims being directed to patent eligible subject matter or include an element or feature that is significantly more than the recited abstract idea (i.e., a technological inventive concept under Step 2B).
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
7. 35 U.S.C. §101 Rejections: Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 1, 5-7, 9-14, and 17-18 that are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered but they are not persuasive because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Applicant’s Argument: From Applicant Arguments/Remarks, Applicants submit that firstly, the method as recited in claim 1 is able to provide a tree diagram that can be displayed in an unconventional manner. Specifically, in a case where multiple interactive icons associated with a same entity are generated, one of the interactive icons is selected as a representative interactive icon for the entity, the representative interactive icon is kept in the tree diagram …Thus, the claimed method is deemed as providing a manner for presenting the capitalization table of a company with improved efficiency for the electronic device, and therefore is deemed as being tied to a practical application. Secondly, the claimed invention can introduce a new way of presenting information contained in a capitalization table in a manner that is more intuitive for users, and to provide a method that generates a tree diagram of a shareholding structure from the capitalization table to present information included in the capitalization table more intuitively to the users. See e.g., paragraph [0004] of the published application. Applicant respectfully submits that the claimed invention can achieve improvements to the tree diagrams technical field. MPEP 2106.05(a).Thirdly, the method of claim 1 is implemented using a specifically programed processor of an electronic device that includes an interface and a display. The processor is specifically programmed to e.g., load the capitalization table, generate a plurality of interactive icons, arrange the plurality of interactive icons, and plot a plurality of investment routes each connecting two interactive icons arranged in the tree diagram. Applicant respectfully submits that the claimed invention applies the judicial exception (if any) with, or by use of, a particular machine. MPEP 2106.05(b). Fourthly, claim 1 specifically recites, in part, "creates a tangible result by transforming a capitalization table of a company into an interactive tree diagram". In the claimed invention, after generating the tree diagram, the electronic device is controlled to display the tree diagram in a manner that the investment routes may be initially hidden and shown only when a command directed to one of the interaction icons is received via an interface … That is, the claimed invention is directed to creating a tangible result by transforming a capitalization table of a company into an interactive tree diagram. Applicant respectfully submits that the claimed invention can effect a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing. MPEP 2106.05(c). Fifthly, claim 1 recites, among others, in part, (1) in response to receipt of user input instructions, loading the capitalization table, (2) generating a plurality of interactive icons, (3) arranging the plurality of interactive icons ... in the tree diagram, where the tree diagram is in the form of a two-dimensional plot, (4) plotting a plurality of investment routes each connecting two interactive icons arranged in the tree diagram … In addition, the features in claim 1 are recited in a detailed manner, require an ordered combination of elements that enables the processor to accomplish a desired result, and are not recited in a high level of generality. Claim 1 recites specific steps for accomplishing the result, not merely to the result. See also Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Sys., Inc., 879 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2018)), where the Federal Circuit found that claims directed to an ordered combination of elements that enable a computer to accomplish a desired result are patent eligible and are not directed to an abstract idea. Even if claim 1 is directed to abstract ideas, which Applicant does not concede, the above features in claim 1 are significantly more than an abstract idea. The above features of claim 1 define an inventive concept that provides patent-eligibility, and are not well-understood, routine or conventional in the field (evidenced by the fact that the prior art rejections were overcome). Step 2B in the 2019 PEG. The claimed features define an inventive concept that provides patent- eligibility, and are not well-understood, routine or conventional in the field. MPEP 2106.05(d). For at least the foregoing reasons, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 and its dependent claims 5-7 and 9-14 are patent eligible subject matter. Claim 8 is cancelled, and thus this rejection is moot against it. Applicant respectfully requests favorable reconsideration of the claims and withdrawal of the rejection (See Applicant Arguments/Remarks Pages 1-5).
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Examiner respectfully submits that unlike the claims in Finjan, independent 1 at issue includes additional elements of ““a processor”, “an electronic device”, “an interface”, and “a display”. However, the additional elements recite generic computer components such as a computer, computing devices, a server, and/or software programing that are recited a high-level of generality that merely perform, conduct, carry out, implement, and/or narrow the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, the additional elements evaluated individually and in combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they comprise or include limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application such as adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea -- See MPEP 2106.05(f) and none of the additional elements taken individually or when taken as an ordered combination amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claim is patent-ineligible. See details of Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 of claims 1, 5-7, 9-14, and 17-18 in the section above.
Relevant Prior Art
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure. The following references are pertinent for disclosing various features relevant to the claimed invention, but they do not disclose all the claimed features, as explained below.
The best prior art of record, Runchey (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0150488), hereinafter, “Runchey”, alone or in combination, neither discloses nor fairly suggests the instant application amended claim limitations of “wherein arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the partial owners includes: for each of the stem node icons that is associated with a direct partial owner, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in a first layer based on the importance value for each of the stem node icons that is associated with an indirect partial owner, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in a layer different from the first layer based on the importance value wherein arranging those of the stem node icons that are associated with the subsidiary parties includes for each of the stem node icons that is associated with a direct subsidiary party, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in another first layer based on the importance value for each of the stem node icons that is associated with an indirect subsidiary party, assigning an importance value to the stem node icon and arranging the stem node icon in a layer different from the first layer and the another first layer based on the importance value: and wherein the interactive icons in a same layer are aligned along a first direction, and the different layers are spaced apart from one another along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction: wherein assigning an importance value to each of the stem node icons includes sorting each of the indirect partial owners into one of a number of groups based on an association with one of the direct partial owners, and assigning each of the indirect partial owners with an importance value with respect to a corresponding one of the groups; wherein assigning an importance value to each of the stem node icons further includes: assigning an importance value to the stem node icon associated with a partial owner that is a natural person to be lower than that assigned to the stem node icon associated with a partial owner that is not a natural person; for each of the partial owners that is a natural person, assigning an importance value that is positively related to the percentage of the ownership of the company to the corresponding stem node icon; for each of the partial owners that is not a natural person, assigning an importance value that is positively related to the percentage of the ownership of the company to the corresponding stem node icon; and for each of the subsidiary parties, assigning an importance value that is positively related to the percentage of the ownership by the company to the corresponding stem node icon; the method further comprising :controlling the display to display the tree diagram; in response to receipt of a first command directed to one of the interactive icons on the tree diagram via the interface, controlling the display to display information associated with one of the related-parties that corresponds to the one of the interactive icons, wherein the tree diagram is initially displayed without showing the investment routes; and in response to receipt of a second command directed to one of the interactive icons on the tree diagram via the interface, display one or more investment routes that involve the one of the interactive icons; and in a case where multiple interactive icons associated with a same entity are generated, selecting one of the interactive icons as a representative interactive icon for the entity, keeping the representative interactive icon in the tree diagram, and removing other interactive icons from the tree diagram; wherein a stem node icon representing a partial owner is selected as the representative interactive icon over a stem node icon representing a subsidiary party, and in a case where multiple interactive icons representing the same entity as partial owners or as subsidiary parties appear in different layers, the interactive icon appearing in the layer that is closest to the root node icon is selected as the representative interactive icon.”
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Liz Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-5414. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 8:00 A.M to 5:00 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Gart, can be reached on (571) 272-3955. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center system (visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (USA or CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/LIZ P NGUYEN/
Examiner, Art Unit 3696
/MATTHEW S GART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3696
Prosecution Insights