DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the original application filed on 08/01/2023. Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Examiner’s Note
Regarding claim 15, “A computer program product” that comprises “one or more computer readable storage media” as recited in the claim appears to be limited in the specification to exclude transitory forms of signal transmission ([0029]). The aforementioned medium can therefore be interpreted to be not directed to transitory forms of signal transmission. However, Examiner still suggests Applicant to consider amending to include “non-transitory” for clarity.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 15, “to us the log profile” should be -- to use the log profile-- (line 8).
Regarding claim 15, “to us the log profile” should be -- to use the log profile-- (line 8).
Appropriate correction is required.
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 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being unpatentable subject matter.
Regarding claims 8-14, the claims are determined to be directed to software per se based upon consideration of all of the relevant factors with respect to the claim as a whole. Each system claim as a whole appears to lack sufficient structure since “one or more computers” without further structural context may be considered software. It is noted that “one or more processor devices” in the preamble that does not breathe life and meaning into the body of the claim was not given patentable weight. Software per se is not directed to one of the four statutory categories, i.e. non-statutory and not patentable, as established in Gottschalk v. Benson. Refer to MPEP 2106(I).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly claims 8 and 15), the term “those” (line 5) is a pronoun which renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear as to exactly what “those” refers to, making the metes and bounds of the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly claims 8 and 15), the term “useful” (line 6) is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear as to what constitutes attributes and fields to be useful, making the metes and bounds of the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly claims 8 and 15), “optimizing the plurality of attributes and fields” (lines 6-7) renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear as to exactly what the functionality of optimizing entails (e.g. updating the determination of useful attributes and fields, optimizing values of the attributes and field, optimizing with respect to certain aspects of the attributes and fields), making the metes and bounds of the claim indefinite. Examiner suggests Applicant to consider reciting additional details regarding the process of optimization in order to clearly overcome the rejection.
Regarding claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20, which claim dependency from claims 1, 8, and 15, they are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claims 1, 8, and 15 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: Wang et al. (US 2017/0075932 A1: Log Storage Optimization), Calagaz (US 2021/0150876 A1: System and Method for Tracking Fishing Regulations), Eberlein et al. (US 2021/0089384 A1: Issue-Resolution Automation), and Kaufmann et al. (US 2013/0046940 A1: Optimization of Memory by Tailored Generation of Runtime Structures).
In the case of amendments, applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and support, for ascertaining the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIL H. LEE whose telephone number is 571-272-3408. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri: 9am-6pm EST.
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, Glenton B. Burgess can be reached on 571-272-3949. 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.
/GIL H. LEE/
Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Prosecution Insights