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
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to the judicial exception of abstract ideas without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) abstract ideas as indicated by in-line comments below. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application for reasons also indicated by in-line comments below. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for reasons also indicated by in-line comments below.
1. An information processing apparatus comprising a controller (does not integrate into a practical application because generic computer performing generic computer functions; not significantly more because generic computer performing generic computer functions), wherein
in a case in which the controller predicts, based on weather data, that there will be adverse weather that could cause damage to a crop in a field (abstract; mental processes; observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion), the controller is configured to present reference information and propose harvesting before the adverse weather (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity).
2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to present (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity) a projected profit of the crop for each harvest timing as the reference information (abstract; mathematical concepts; mathematical relationships).
3. The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the controller is configured to present (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity) a maximum projected profit of the crop for each harvest timing as the reference information (abstract; mathematical concepts; mathematical relationships), the maximum projected profit being calculated based on a score that is an evaluation index of the crop (abstract; mathematical concepts; mathematical calculations).
4. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to present (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity) a market price of the crop for each harvest timing as the reference information (abstract; mathematical concepts; mathematical relationships), the market price being obtained by providing a potential purchaser of the crop with quality information on the crop for each harvest timing.
5. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to present (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity) past damage information for the field under similar weather conditions to the adverse weather as the reference information (abstract; mental processes; observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion).
6. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to present (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity) income and expenditure results for the field as the reference information.
7. The information processing apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to propose (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity) harvesting after the adverse weather as an alternative in a case in which there is a surplus in income and expenditure for a predetermined period as indicated by the income and expenditure results (abstract; mental processes; observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion).
8. A method to be executed by an information processing apparatus (does not integrate into a practical application because generic computer performing generic computer functions; not significantly more because generic computer performing generic computer functions), the method comprising: presenting, in a case in which it is predicted based on weather data that there will be adverse weather that could cause damage to a crop in a field (abstract; mental processes; observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion), reference information and proposing harvesting before the adverse weather (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity).
Regarding claims 9-14, see the foregoing rejections of claims 2-7, respectively.
15. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program (does not integrate into a practical application because insignificant extra-solution activity; not significantly more because insignificant extra-solution activity) configured to cause an information processing apparatus (does not integrate into a practical application because generic computer performing generic computer functions; not significantly more because generic computer performing generic computer functions) to execute operations, the operations comprising:
presenting, in a case in which it is predicted based on weather data that there will be adverse weather that could cause damage to a crop in a field (abstract; mental processes; observation, evaluation, judgment, or opinion), reference information and proposing harvesting before the adverse weather.
Regarding claims 16-20, see the foregoing rejections of claims 2-6, respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 8-10, 12-13, 15-17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Allen et al. (2020/0390044).
Regarding claim 1, Allen et al. disclose an information processing apparatus comprising a controller (302; see paragraph 109), wherein in a case in which the controller predicts, based on weather data (meteorological prediction data; see paragraph 119), that there will be adverse weather (high temperature; see paragraph 145) that could cause damage (sunburn; see paragraph 145) to a crop (fruit; see paragraph 145) in a field, the controller is configured to present (via GUI; see paragraph 139) reference information (local area agricultural parameter; see paragraph 139) and propose harvesting before the adverse weather (propose early harvest; see paragraph 145).
Regarding claim 2, Allen et al. disclose the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to present a projected profit of the crop for each harvest timing as the reference information (see paragraphs 147 and 173-176; profitability is among the optimizable functions, and input timings may be discretized).
Regarding claim 3, Allen et al. disclose the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the controller is configured to present a maximum projected profit of the crop for each harvest timing as the reference information, the maximum projected profit being calculated based on a score that is an evaluation index of the crop (see the foregoing rejection of claim 2).
Regarding claim 5, Allen et al. disclose the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to present past damage information (sunburn; see paragraphs 145 and 156) for the field under similar weather conditions (synoptic situation; see paragraph 156) to the adverse weather as the reference information.
Regarding claim 6, Allen et al. disclose the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to present income and expenditure results for the field as the reference information (see paragraphs 173-178).
Regarding claims 8-10, and 12-13, see the foregoing rejections of claims 1-3 and 5-6 respectively.
Regarding claim 15, see the foregoing rejection of claim 1, for all limitations except the following.
Allen et al. disclose a non-transitory computer readable medium (304; see paragraph 109) storing a program configured to cause an information processing apparatus to execute operations, the operations comprising: ... (limitations similar to those of claim 1)
Regarding claims 16-17 and 19, see the foregoing rejections of claims 2-3 and 5, respectively.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEOFFREY T EVANS whose telephone number is (571)272-2369. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9 AM - 5:30 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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/GEOFFREY T EVANS/Examiner, Art Unit 2852