DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the original filing of 12-29-2023. Claims 1-26 are pending and have been considered below:
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 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-20 represent method, system and medium type claims. Therefore claims 1-26 are directed to either a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Regarding claims 1, 25 and 26:
2A Prong 1:
generating a plurality of candidate future trajectories that are each a respective prediction of a subset of future states in a future trajectory of the agent at a plurality of future time steps, wherein generating each candidate future trajectory comprises:
and updating the candidate trajectory to include data identifying the predicted next state; and after performing the one or more planning iterations, determining a respective task score for the candidate trajectory that measures a performance of the candidate trajectory on the task; selecting, from at least a subset of the candidate future trajectories, a candidate future trajectory that has a highest respective task score; selecting an action to be performed by the agent in response to the current observation using at least the latent skill vector for the first planning iteration for the selected candidate future trajectory;
As drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion-providing an input and selection can be mentally performed).
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
receiving a current observation characterizing a current state of the environment at the time step;
(adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception-see MPEP 2106.05 (G))
initializing the candidate future trajectory to include data characterizing the current state of the environment at the current time step; at each of one or more planning iterations: obtaining a latent skill vector for the planning iteration; processing a trajectory decoder input comprising (i) the latent skill vector for the planning iteration and (ii) data characterizing a last state identified in the candidate trajectory at a last future time step in the candidate trajectory as of the planning iteration using a trajectory decoder neural network to generate a trajectory decoder output that characterizes a predicted later state of the environment, wherein the predicted later state is a state that is predicted to be a state of the environment at a later future time step in the future trajectory, wherein there are one or more future time steps between the last future time step in the candidate trajectory and the later future time step, and the predicted later state is a state that is predicted to be the state of the environment at the later future time step given that the agent is controlled using the latent skill vector for the planning iteration at the last future time step and at each of the one or more future time steps that are between the last future time step and the later future time step;
(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 controlling the agent to perform the selected action.
(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)).
System comprising one or more computers and one or more storage devices storing instructions that when executed by the one or more computers
One or more non-transitory computer storage media storing instructions that when executed by one or more computers cause the one or more computers to perform operations (MERE INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLY THE EXCEPTION USING A GENERIC COMPUTER COMPONENT)
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
receiving a current observation characterizing a current state of the environment at the time step;
(MPEP 2106.05 (d)(II) indicate that merely “receiving or transmitting data over a network” is a well-understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner. Thereby, a conclusion that the claimed receiving step is well-understood, routine, conventional activity is supported under Berkheimer).
initializing the candidate future trajectory to include data characterizing the current state of the environment at the current time step; at each of one or more planning iterations: obtaining a latent skill vector for the planning iteration; processing a trajectory decoder input comprising (i) the latent skill vector for the planning iteration and (ii) data characterizing a last state identified in the candidate trajectory at a last future time step in the candidate trajectory as of the planning iteration using a trajectory decoder neural network to generate a trajectory decoder output that characterizes a predicted later state of the environment, wherein the predicted later state is a state that is predicted to be a state of the environment at a later future time step in the future trajectory, wherein there are one or more future time steps between the last future time step in the candidate trajectory and the later future time step, and the predicted later state is a state that is predicted to be the state of the environment at the later future time step given that the agent is controlled using the latent skill vector for the planning iteration at the last future time step and at each of the one or more future time steps that are between the last future time step and the later future time step;
(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 controlling the agent to perform the selected action.
(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)).
System comprising one or more computers and one or more storage devices storing instructions that when executed by the one or more computers
One or more non-transitory computer storage media storing instructions that when executed by one or more computers cause the one or more computers to perform operations
(MERE INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLY THE EXCEPTION USING A GENERIC COMPUTER COMPONENT)
Regarding claim 2:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
processing a policy input derived from the current observation and the latent skill vector obtained for the first planning iteration for the selected candidate trajectory using an action decoder neural network to generate a policy output that defines an action to be performed in response to the current observation; and selecting the action using the policy output. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
processing a policy input derived from the current observation and the latent skill vector obtained for the first planning iteration for the selected candidate trajectory using an action decoder neural network to generate a policy output that defines an action to be performed in response to the current observation; and selecting the action using the policy output. (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)).
Regarding claim 3:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the policy output specifies a probability distribution over a set of actions to be performed by the agent.
(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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the policy output specifies a probability distribution over a set of actions to be performed by the agent.
(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)).
Regarding claim 4:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder output defines an observation characterizing the predicted later state of the environment. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder output defines an observation characterizing the predicted later state of the environment. (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)).
Regarding claim 5:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder output defines a delta between an observation characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory and the observation characterizing the predicted later state of the environment. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder output defines a delta between an observation characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory and the observation characterizing the predicted later state of the environment. (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)).
Regarding claim 6:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
generating the observation characterizing the predicted later state of the environment by combining the delta and the observation characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
generating the observation characterizing the predicted later state of the environment by combining the delta and the observation characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory. (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)).
Regarding claim 7:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder output is (i) the delta or (ii) a normalized version of the delta.
(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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder output is (i) the delta or (ii) a normalized version of the delta.
(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)).
Regarding claim 8:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
processing the current observation using a state encoder neural network to generate state features of the current state, wherein: for the first planning iteration, the data characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory are the state features of the current state, and for any planning iterations after the first planning iteration, the data characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory are state features generated using the trajectory decoder output generated at the preceding planning iteration.
(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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
processing the current observation using a state encoder neural network to generate state features of the current state, wherein: for the first planning iteration, the data characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory are the state features of the current state, and for any planning iterations after the first planning iteration, the data characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory are state features generated using the trajectory decoder output generated at the preceding planning iteration.
(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)).
Regarding claim 9:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
for any planning iterations after the first planning iteration, processing an observation defined by the trajectory decoder output generated at the preceding planning iteration using the state encoder neural network to generate the state features. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
for any planning iterations after the first planning iteration, processing an observation defined by the trajectory decoder output generated at the preceding planning iteration using the state encoder neural network to generate the state features. (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)).
Regarding claim 10:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the policy input comprises state features of the current state and the latent skill vector obtained for the first planning iteration for the selected candidate trajectory.
(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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the policy input comprises state features of the current state and the latent skill vector obtained for the first planning iteration for the selected candidate trajectory.
(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)).
Regarding claim 11:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
sampling the latent skill vector from a probability distribution for the planning iteration, the probability distribution for the planning iteration being a probability distribution over a space of latent skill vectors. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
sampling the latent skill vector from a probability distribution for the planning iteration, the probability distribution for the planning iteration being a probability distribution over a space of latent skill vectors. (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)).
Regarding claim 12:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the probability distribution is a fixed prior distribution that is the same for all of the planning iterations. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the probability distribution is a fixed prior distribution that is the same for all of the planning iterations. (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)).
Regarding claim 13:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
processing the data characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory at the last future time step in the candidate trajectory as of the planning iteration using a proposal neural network to generate a proposal output that specifies parameters of the probability distribution for the planning iteration. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
processing the data characterizing the last state identified in the candidate trajectory at the last future time step in the candidate trajectory as of the planning iteration using a proposal neural network to generate a proposal output that specifies parameters of the probability distribution for the planning iteration. (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)).
Regarding claim 14:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
for each state identified in the candidate trajectory, applying a reward function for the task to data characterizing the state to generate a reward score for the state; and combining the reward scores for the states identified in the candidate trajectory. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
for each state identified in the candidate trajectory, applying a reward function for the task to data characterizing the state to generate a reward score for the state; and combining the reward scores for the states identified in the candidate trajectory. (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)).
Regarding claim 15:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
computing a time-discounted sum of the reward scores for the states. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
computing a time-discounted sum of the reward scores for the states. (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)).
Regarding claim 16:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein generating a plurality of candidate future trajectories comprises generating the plurality of candidate future trajectories in parallel. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein generating a plurality of candidate future trajectories comprises generating the plurality of candidate future trajectories in parallel. (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)).
Regarding claim 17:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein each candidate future trajectory is generated on a different one of a plurality of devices or on a different core of a plurality of cores of one or more devices. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein each candidate future trajectory is generated on a different one of a plurality of devices or on a different core of a plurality of cores of one or more devices. (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)).
Regarding claim 18:
2A Prong 1:
selecting, from the plurality of candidate future trajectories, a candidate future trajectory that has a highest respective task score.
As drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion-selection can be mentally performed).
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
No Additional elements:
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
No Additional elements:
Regarding claim 19:
2A Prong 1:
generating a respective subset of the candidate future trajectories at each of a plurality of cross-entropy iterations.
As drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion).
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
No Additional elements:
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
No Additional elements:
Regarding claim 20:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
for each cross-entropy iteration after the first cross-entropy iteration, generating parameters of probability distributions for the planning iterations performed while generating the subset of trajectories for the cross-entropy iteration based on statistics of a first highest scoring subset of candidate future trajectories generated at the preceding cross-entropy iteration. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
for each cross-entropy iteration after the first cross-entropy iteration, generating parameters of probability distributions for the planning iterations performed while generating the subset of trajectories for the cross-entropy iteration based on statistics of a first highest scoring subset of candidate future trajectories generated at the preceding cross-entropy iteration. (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)).
Regarding claim 21:
2A Prong 1:
selecting, from the subset of candidate future trajectories generated at the last cross- entropy iteration, a candidate future trajectory that has a highest respective task score.
As drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion-A SELECTION CAN BE MENTALLY PERFORMED).
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
No Additional elements:
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
No Additional elements:
Regarding claim 22:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein there are a fixed number of time steps between the last future time step in the future trajectory as of the planning iteration and the later future time step in the future trajectory, the fixed number is greater than or equal to one, and wherein the trajectory decoder output is generated given that the agent is controlled using the latent skill vector for the planning iteration at the last future time step and at each of the fixed number of time steps. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein there are a fixed number of time steps between the last future time step in the future trajectory as of the planning iteration and the later future time step in the future trajectory, the fixed number is greater than or equal to one, and wherein the trajectory decoder output is generated given that the agent is controlled using the latent skill vector for the planning iteration at the last future time step and at each of the fixed number of time steps. (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)).
Regarding claim 23:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder neural network and the action decoder neural network have been trained jointly on a set of training state-action trajectories, each training state-action trajectories being a sequence of observation - action pairs that each include an observation and an action performed in response to the observation. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder neural network and the action decoder neural network have been trained jointly on a set of training state-action trajectories, each training state-action trajectories being a sequence of observation - action pairs that each include an observation and an action performed in response to the observation. (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)).
Regarding claim 24:
2A Prong 1:
No additional abstract ideas
2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder neural network and the action decoder neural network have been trained jointly with an encoder neural network that is configured to process data characterizing the observations in each training state-action trajectory to generate an encoder output that defines a latent skill vector representing the training state- action trajectory. (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)).
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the trajectory decoder neural network and the action decoder neural network have been trained jointly with an encoder neural network that is configured to process data characterizing the observations in each training state-action trajectory to generate an encoder output that defines a latent skill vector representing the training state- action trajectory. (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)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-26 are allowable over prior art, however are rejected under 101.
Conclusion
In the interests of compact prosecution, Applicant is invited to contact the examiner via electronic media pursuant to USPTO policy outlined MPEP § 502.03. All electronic communication must be authorized in writing. Applicant may wish to file an Internet Communications Authorization Form PTO/SB/439. Applicant may wish to request an interview using the Interview Practice website: http://www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and-regulations/interview-practice.
Applicant is reminded Internet e-mail may not be used for communication for matters under 35 U.S.C. § 132 or which otherwise require a signature. A reply to an Office action may NOT be communicated by Applicant to the USPTO via Internet e-mail. If such a reply is submitted by Applicant via Internet e-mail, a paper copy will be placed in the appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED. See MPEP § 502.03(II).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHERROD KEATON whose telephone number is 571-270-1697. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am to 5:00pm.
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 MICHELLE BECHTOLD can be reached at 571-431-0762. 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.
/SHERROD L KEATON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2148
6-7-2026
Prosecution Insights