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 .
Amendments
This action is in response to amendments filed July 1st, 2026, in which Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 12-16, 19, and 20 have been amended. Claims 2, 8, 11, and 17 are cancelled. The amendments have been entered, and Claims 1, 3-7, 9, 10, 12-16, and 18-20 are currently pending.
Claim Interpretation
The term computer readable storage medium is interpreted, as defined in [0016] of the specification, not to include transitory signals per se.
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, 3-7, 9, 10, 12-16, and 18-20 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 method, thus a process, one of the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter. However, the claim further recites collecting a dataset D (interpreted in light of Claim 3 as sampling from a probability distribution, thus a mathematical calculation); identifying a target policy (a mental process); calculating a support function estimate (a mathematical calculation); approximating a discriminator set (a mental process); calculating an importance weight estimate by applying a loss function in a certain circumstance (a mathematical calculation); and calculating a minimax interval estimate (a mathematical calculation). Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea of calculating a minimax interval estimate from data.
The claim does not include any additional elements at all to the abstract idea, and thus cannot include any additional elements which could integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Therefore, the claim is subject matter ineligible.
Dependent Claims 3-7 and 9 exclusively recite mathematical calculations, i.e. additional steps in the abstract idea, and thus cannot recite any additional elements which could integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Claims 10, 12-16, and 18 recite a computing system comprising a processor set and computer readable storage medium storing computer readable program instructions … for implementing precisely the method of Claims 1, 3-7, and 9. Thus, the claims recite an article of manufacture, one of the four statutory categories of subject matter. However, as the claims recite merely generic computer components to perform the identical abstract idea of Claims 1, 3-7, and 9, respectively (which can neither integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself, see MPEP 2106.05(f)(2)), Claims 10, 12-16, and 18 are rejected for reasons set forth in the rejections of Claims 1, 3-7, and 9, respectively. Similarly, Claims 19 and 20 recite a computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium (interpreted in light of the special definition in the specification as a non-transitory computer readable medium) to perform the methods of Claims 1 and 4, respectively, and are similarly rejected, in view of MPEP 2106.05(f)(2), as reciting an abstract idea, merely performed on generic computer equipment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed July 1st, 2026 have been fully considered, but are not fully persuasive.
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the Claim Objections, 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections, and 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections (by incorporating subject matter identified as not found in the prior art) of the previous office action.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejections of the claims have been fully considered, but are unpersuasive.
Applicant’s arguments focus on an alleged “technical problem associated with insufficient data coverage when performing offline policy evaluation” and specifically states “approximating a solution to a weighted Adjoint Bellman Equation.” However, all of the recited limitation, and all of the applicant’s arguments, are directed towards the improvement in an abstract idea itself – an evaluation of data, an approximate solution to an equation, an estimate of an importance sampling value. An improvement in an abstract idea itself remains an abstract idea, and is not subject-matter eligible. Applicant states “the claimed practical application is reflected in the claim language” (pg. 14 of the response, 2nd paragraph) but all of the elements that the applicant cites to are mathematical features (i.e. “an output of the OPE is an interval indicating an uncertainty of the evaluation”). Claim 1 does not recite any elements additional to the pure abstract idea, and thus cannot recite any additional elements which could integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (under Step 2A Prong 2) nor provide significantly more (under Step 2B). Applicant’s arguments regarding additional elements in Step 2B again recites only steps of the abstract idea, and not any additional elements – a specific, novel, ordered implementation of mental and mathematical process steps, with any elements additional to the abstract idea (as in Claim 1) only recites an abstract idea. The other independent claims recite generic computer components performing that abstract idea.
Conclusion
The claims have been searched, but no prior art which teaches the recited mathematical expression for the error estimate now recited in the independent claims has been uncovered.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN M SMITH whose telephone number is (469)295-9104. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am - 4pm Pacific.
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, Kakali Chaki can be reached at (571) 272-3719. 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.
/BRIAN M SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2122
Prosecution Insights