DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final rejection
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 Objections
Claims 9 and 11-14 objected to because of the following informalities: “The computing apparatus of claim 1” should be changed to “The computing apparatus of claim 8”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 objected to because of the following informalities: “The computing apparatus of claim 2” should be changed to “The computing apparatus of claim 9”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 16 and 18-20 objected to because of the following informalities: “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 1” should be changed to “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 objected to because of the following informalities: “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 2” should be changed to “The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16”. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Each of claims 1-20 falls within one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP § 2106.03. For example, each of claim 1-7 falls within category of process; For example, each of claims 8-20 fall within category of machine, i.e., a “concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices.” Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348–49, 111 USPQ2d at 1719 (quoting Burr v. Duryee, 68 U.S. 531, 570, 17 L. Ed. 650, 657 (1863));
Regarding Claims 1-7
Step 2A – Prong 1
Exemplary claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea of mitigating climate risk.
The abstract idea is set forth or described by the following bold limitations:
1. A method for mitigating climate risk, the method comprising:
determining an environmental forecast factor based on one or more predictive climate models, the environmental forecast factor being an environmental condition applied to a specific home;
determining a severity of the environmental forecast factor on the specific home over a period of time; and
generating a mitigation action for the specific home, the mitigation action including an asset that is inversely related to the environmental forecast factor over the period of time..
The bold limitations above represent plurality of mental steps because a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or merely data observations, evaluations, and/or judgements . Therefore, the bold limitations fall within the subject matter groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in Section I of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
For example, the limitations “determining an environmental forecast factor [..]; determining a severity of the environmental forecast factor [..]; and generating a mitigation action [..]” of mental steps because a process that can be performed by can be performed mentally and/or with pen and paper or merely data observations, evaluations, and/or judgements, see [0017]-[0023] of current application discloser .
Limitations are considered together as a single abstract idea for further analysis. (discussing Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010)).
Step 2A – Prong 2
Claims 1 does not include additional elements (when considered individually, as an ordered combination, and/or within the claim as a whole) that are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
For example, only additional first element is “A computing apparatus comprising: a processor; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, configure the computing apparatus to:”(as cited in claim 8) . This element amounts to mere use of a generic computer components, which is well understood routine and conventional (see background of current discloser and IDS and PTO 892) and this element individually does not provide a practical application. In view of the above, the “additional element” individually or combine does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. see MPEP 2106.05(d).
In view of the above, the “additional elements” individually do not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. Furthermore, the “additional elements” in combination amount to a plurality of generic component with software, where such computers and software amount to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer(s) and/or mere use of a generic computer component(s) as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Therefore, these elements in combination do not provide a practical application. The combination of additional elements does no more than generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, and for this additional reason, the combination of additional elements does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea. Noting MPEP 2106.04(d)(I): “It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception does not guarantee eligibility. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014) ("The fact that a computer ‘necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,’ is beside the point")”.
Step 2B
Claims1 does not include additional elements, when considered individually and as an ordered combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. For example, the limitation of Claim 1 contains additional elements that are, i.e. “processor”, generic device, which are well understood, routine and convention (see background of current discloser and IDS and PTO 892) and MPEP 2106.05(d))The reasons for reaching this conclusion are substantially the same as the reasons given above in § Step 2A – Prong 2. For brevity only, those reasons are not repeated in this section. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(g) and MPEP §§2106.05(II).
.
Dependent Claims 2-7
Dependent claims 2-7 fail to cure this deficiency of independent claim 1 (set forth above) and are rejected accordingly. Particularly, claims 2-7 recite limitations that represent (in addition to the limitations already noted above) either the abstract idea (bold) of mental steps or an additional element that is merely extra-solution activity and/ or post solution activity(italicized), mere use of instructions and/or generic facility and /or computer component(s) as a tool to implement the abstract idea, and/or merely limits the abstract idea to a particular technological environment(under line).
For examples:
2. determining existing home infrastructure for the specific home based on historical data; and
identifying the severity of the environmental forecast factor based on the environmental condition to be applied to the existing home infrastructure.
3.determining an amount of depreciation of the specific home based on the severity of the environmental forecast factor as applied to the existing home infrastructure.
4.dynamically configuring a user interface to enable a user to access the environmental forecast factor for the specific home associated with a user account;
determining predicted home damage based on the environmental forecast factor;
determining one or more climate programs applicable to the predicted home damage based on the environmental forecast factor, wherein the one or more climate programs cover the predicted home damage; and
outputting a recommendation for the one or more climate programs.
5. wherein the environmental forecast factor is based on at least one of drought conditions or fire risk conditions, and the asset is based on at least one of water rights or air conditioning technology.
6. dynamically configuring a user interface to enable a user access to climate data based on the one or more predictive climate models for the specific home, wherein the specific home is associated with a user account; and
arranging a layout personalized to the specific home;
based at least in part on receiving an indication of an interaction with the layout,
associating an applet corresponding to a selected service based on the mitigation action; and launching an onboarding flow associated with the mitigation action, wherein the onboarding flow is customized for at least one of the user or the selected service.
7. selecting an optimal booklet for an optimal instrument and for the specific home from a plurality of booklets based on the environmental forecast factor personalized to the specific home; and
outputting a recommendation for the optimal booklet to a device associated with a user account of the specific home, wherein the recommendation is based on educational information about the instrument as applied to the specific home..
Regarding Claims 8-20
Claims 8-20 contains language similar to claim 1-7 as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, and for reasons similar to those discussed above, claims 8-20 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101(abstract idea).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Eby et al. (US 2022/0415155).
Regarding Claims 1 8 and 15. Eby teaches a method for mitigating climate risk, the method comprising(fig. 1, fig. 10; abstract):
determining an environmental forecast factor based on one or more predictive climate models, the environmental forecast factor being an environmental condition applied to a specific home(180, 182: fig.2; [0069]-[0073]);
determining a severity of the environmental forecast factor on the specific home over a period of time(184, 186: fig.10;[0074]-[0077]); and
generating a mitigation action for the specific home, the mitigation action including an asset that is inversely related to the environmental forecast factor over the period of time(188: fig. 10; based on severity of climate the annualized expectation of financial losses to a property: [0078]-[0083]).
Regarding Claims 2, 9 and 16. Eby further teaches determining existing home infrastructure for the specific home based on historical data(building footprint data:[0030]-[0031], [0071]); and
identifying the severity of the environmental forecast factor based on the environmental condition to be applied to the existing home infrastructure(186: fig. 10; [0071]-[0074]).
Regarding Claims 3, 10 and 17. Eby further teaches determining an amount of depreciation of the specific home based on the severity of the environmental forecast factor as applied to the existing home infrastructure (188: fig. 10; the annualized expectation of financial losses to a property: [0078]-[0079]).
Regarding Claims 4, 11 and 18. Eby further teaches dynamically configuring a user interface to enable a user to access the environmental forecast factor for the specific home associated with a user account([0032], [0043]; 190: fig. 10, [0079], [0086]);
determining predicted home damage based on the environmental forecast factor (flood depth for flooding to a property, Chance data may include values for each of the low, mid, and high climate scenarios, the Average Annual Loss: [0080]-[0083]).
determining one or more climate programs applicable to the predicted home damage based on the environmental forecast factor, wherein the one or more climate programs cover the predicted home damage(The API may include a FEMA API that provides National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) claims data from FEMA including the number of policies, number of claims, amount of coverage, and amount paid on claims: [0084]); and
outputting a recommendation for the one or more climate programs(The API may include a tiles AP that incorporate hazard layers into external maps or overlay for analysis visually showing extents of past, present or future risk: [0084]).
Regarding Claims 5, 12 and 19. Eby further teaches the environmental forecast factor is based on at least one of drought conditions or fire risk conditions([0027], [0028],[0035], [0049], [0069]), and the asset is based on at least one of water rights or air conditioning technology (the computation portion 120 may use a maximum value indicated by the hazard layer in the footprint that indicates the property. For example, the maximum depth of water in a flood may be taken from the hazard values within the footprint within the property or parcel: [0031], [0072]).
Regarding Claims 6, 13 and 20. Eby further teaches dynamically configuring (API)a user interface to enable a user access to climate data based on the one or more predictive climate models for the specific home, wherein the specific home is associated with a user account([0032], [0043] , [0082], [0084]-[0087]); and
arranging a layout personalized to the specific home([0082], [0084]-[0087]);
based at least in part on receiving an indication of an interaction with the layout,
associating an applet corresponding to a selected service based on the mitigation action (The API may include an environmental API that provides information about how changing weather patterns and higher seas contribute to greater risks in the future. The API may include a FEMA API that provides National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) claims data from FEMA including the number of policies, number of claims, amount of coverage, and amount paid on claims:[0084]-[0087]); and launching an onboarding flow associated with the mitigation action, wherein the onboarding flow is customized for at least one of the user or the selected service([0084]-[0087]).
Regarding Claims 7 and 14. Eby further teaches selecting an optimal booklet for an optimal instrument and for the specific home from a plurality of booklets based on the environmental forecast factor personalized to the specific home([0045], [0070], [0078]--[0086]); and
outputting a recommendation for the optimal booklet to a device associated with a user account of the specific home, wherein the recommendation is based on educational information about the instrument as applied to the specific home(190: fig. 1; [0050], [0078]-[0087] ).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) US 20250060233: A system and method for evaluating accuracy of operation of sensors of a climate control unit in a premises are disclosed. The method includes receiving, from a plurality of sensors, output signals indicative of a climate within the premises. The method further includes determining one or more climate parameters within the premises based on the received output signals. The method further includes receiving one or more historical climate parameters. The method further includes generating a virtual model configured to generate one or more virtual climate parameters. The method further includes determining, based on comparison of the climate parameters and the virtual climate parameters, a range of variation for the climate parameters. The method further includes determining an accuracy of operation of the plurality of sensors based on comparison of variation between the climate parameters and the virtual climate parameters with the determined range of variation for the climate parameters.
b) US 20220051344: The disclosure includes a system and method for determining climate risk using artificial intelligence including receiving a location of a property from a user; obtaining property data associated with the property, wherein the property data includes image data of the property; determining, using a first climate risk model associated with a first climate risk, a first score associated with the property, the first scores representing a first climate risk to the property; and determining, using a second climate risk model, a second score associated with the property; presenting the first score representing the first climate risk to the property and the second score associated with the property to the user.
c) US 20220043180: The system and method for generating a forecast or simulation in a hydrologic environment includes the comparison of real-world observations with archived model states to generate or obtain initial conditions for the generation of the forecast or simulation. By using archived model states to generate forecast initial conditions, a more realistic simulation may be generated. The output of the simulation may then be stored as new model states with the other archived model states to maintain an updated archive of model states.
D) US 20210396415: disclose Building management systems and methods are described herein which augment predicted weather data with an external model of a built environment to calculate wind infiltration into a specific building or wind conditions at a building site. The wind infiltration can be used to predict the performance characteristic of at least one energy consuming component installed in the building, whereas the wind conditions can be used to determine whether the calculated wind conditions exceed a safety threshold.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD K ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0328. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/MOHAMMAD K ISLAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights