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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a Final Office Action in response to communications received on 10/8/24.
Claims 5-6, 12-13, 19-20 have been cancelled.
Claims 1, 8, 15 have been amended.
Claims 21-22 have been added.
Therefore, Claims 1-4,7-11,14-18, 21-22 are now pending and have been addressed 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 1-4,7-11,14-18, 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Identifying Statutory Categories
In the instant case, claims 1-4, 7, 21-22 are directed to a system, claims 15-18 are directed to a non-transitory medium and claims 8-11, 14 are directed to a method. Thus, the claims fall within one of the four statutory categories. Nevertheless, the claims fall within the judicial exception of an abstract idea.
Step 2A: Prong 1 Identifying a Judicial Exception
Under Step 2A, prong 1, Claims 1-4,7-11,14-18, 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites an abstract idea without significantly more. Independent claims 1, 7 and 13 recite methods that accepting registration of a target company as a virtual company from an account of a downstream company positioned downstream of the target company in a supply chain; accepting input of information on a target product of the target company, included in a product of the downstream company, from the account of the downstream company; registering the information on the target product in association with information on the product of the downstream company; in response to registering the information on the target product, generating, a temporary account for the virtual company and a storage area associated with the temporary account, allocating the storage area associated with the temporary account to the virtual company, and storing the information on the target product in the storage area allocated to the virtual company; after generating the temporary account for the virtual company; sending communication on the information on the target product to the target company as a destination the communication including a request to join the digital platform; creating a regular account corresponding to the target company in response to acquisition of notification of acceptance of joining the platform from the target company; and upon creating the regular account, reallocating the storage area allocated to the temporary account for the virtual company to the regular account for the target company.
These limitations as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers methods of organizing human activity (including commercial interactions such as business relations, managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions), including interaction between person and computer), but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting the structural elements (such as an information processing apparatus, a processor, digital platform (Claim 1), a computer (Claim 8), non-transitory medium, one or more processors (Claim 15)), the claims are directed to sending information on target product to company. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation of organizing human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2 - This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim merely describes how to generally “apply” the concept of receiving data, analyzing it, and providing information on target product. In particular, the claims only recites the additional element – an information processing apparatus, a control unit (Claim 1), a computer (Claim 8), non-transitory medium, one or more processors (Claim 15). The additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to merely 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, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f). Also, the limitations reciting “ sending communication…” is merely a post-solution step of transmitting data output—a nominal addition to the claim that does not meaningfully limit the claim. Therefore, sending step is an insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Simply implementing the abstract idea on generic components is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Accordingly, these additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claims are directed to an abstract idea. When considered in combination, the claims do not amount to improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(a), applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(b), effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(c), or applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(e). Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Considering Additional Elements
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the claims describe how to generally “apply” to; providing information on target product. The claim(s) do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The independent claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are not patent eligible. The dependent claim(s) when analyzed as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea. The dependent claims are not significantly more because they are part of the identified judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(g). The claims are not patent eligible. With respect to an information processing apparatus, a control unit (Claim 1), a computer (Claim 8), non-transitory medium, one or more processors (Claim 15), these limitations are described in Applicant’s own specification as generic and conventional elements. See Applicants specification, Paragraph [0045]-[0046] details “ The server apparatus 1 may be configured as a computer including a processor (a CPU, a GPU, or the like), a main storage device (a RAM, a ROM, or the like), and an auxiliary storage device (an EPROM, a hard disk drive, a removable medium, or the like). [0047] The control unit 11 can be implemented by, for example, a hardware processor, such as a CPU. The control unit 11 may be configured to include a RAM, a read only memory (ROM), a cache memory, or the like.” These are basic computer elements applied merely to carry out data processing such as, discussed above, receiving, analyzing, transmitting and displaying data, which fall under well-understood, routine and conventional functions of generic computers. As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitations of “sending communication.. steps” amount to transmitting data over a network and are well understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. Furthermore, the use of such generic computers to receive or transmit data over a network has been identified as a well understood, routine and conventional activity by the courts. See Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AVAuto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93, OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result-a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink." (emphasis added)); Also see MPEP 2106.05(d) discussing elements that the courts have recognized as well-understood, routine and conventional activities in particular fields. Lastly, the additional elements provides only a result-oriented solution which lacks details as to how the computer performs the claimed abstract idea. Therefore, the additional elements amount to mere instructions to apply the exception. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Furthermore, these steps/components are not explicitly recited and therefore must be construed at the highest level of generality and are well-understood, routine and conventional limitations that amount to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. Therefore, the claimed invention does not demonstrate a technologically rooted solution to a computer-centric problem or recite an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the function of any computer itself, applying the exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, add a specific limitation other than what is well-understood, routine and conventional in the field, add unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application, or provide meaningful limitations beyond generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment such as computing. Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination does not add anything further than looking at the limitations individually. Taking the additional claimed elements individually and in combination, the computer components at each step of the process perform purely generic computer functions. Viewed as a whole, the claims do not purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself, or to improve any other technology or technical field. Use of an unspecified, generic computer does not transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention. Thus, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Dependent claims 2-4, 7, 9-11, 14, and 16-18, 21-22 add additional limitations, for example but these only serve to further limit the abstract idea, and hence are nonetheless directed towards fundamentally the same abstract idea as representative claims 1, 8 and 15.
Claims 2-3, 7,9-10,14 16-17 recites wherein the information on the target product includes traceability-related information of the target product; wherein the traceability- related information includes information on at least one of an amount of emission of greenhouse effect gas, a recycling rate, or a due diligence; the product related to a battery. The claims are directed to the same abstract idea as claims 1, 8 and 15 and simply provide further details for this abstract idea. The claims do not provide any new additional elements beyond abstract idea, therefore, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor do they provide significantly more to the abstract idea.
Claims 4, 11, 18 recites wherein the communication sent includes a request to seek confirmation as to whether there is an error in the traceability-related information; wherein the communication sent includes a request to join a platform. The claims are directed to the same abstract idea as claims 1, 8 and 15 and simply provide further details for this abstract idea. The claims do not provide any new additional elements beyond abstract idea, therefore, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor do they provide significantly more to the abstract idea.
Claims 21-22 recites automatically generating a shared storage area for sharing by the downstream company and the virtual company, copying the information from the storage area allocated to the virtual company to the shared storage area, and authorizing access of the shared storage area to the downstream company and the virtual company.; after creating the regular account; automatically reallocating the shared storage area to the downstream company and the target company. The claims are directed to the same abstract idea as claims 1, 8 and 15 and simply provide further details for this abstract idea. The claims do not provide any new additional elements beyond abstract idea, therefore, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor do they provide significantly more to the abstract idea.
The dependent claims do not integrate into a practical application. As such, the additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the exception into a practical application, but rather, the recitation of any additional element amounts to merely reciting the words “apply it” (or equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes 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)). The dependent claims also do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a computing system is merely being used to apply the abstract idea to a technological environment. These limitations do not include an improvement to another technology or technical field, an improvement to the functioning of the computer itself, or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05d. Thus, the claims do not add significantly more to an abstract idea. The claims are ineligible. Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claim that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the exception itself, the claims are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter. See (Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al.).
Examiner Note: Subject Matter free of prior art
Regarding Claims 1, 8 and 15, Gruber et al. US (2022/0343229A1) discloses the information processing apparatus comprising a control unit (Fig 1 #106 client devices, [0034], Client devices 102, 104, and/or 106 may be configured to receive and transmit information related to a product traversing a supply chain) wherein the control unit is configured to:
Gruber discloses accepting registration of a target company ([0037] during initial setup (registration), a participant in the supply chain may provide certain information to the system via client device(s) 102, 104, and/or 106. The system may process that information to construct a “state” of that participant. The state of that participant may be stored remotely on server(s) 116, 118, and/or 120, and/or locally at databases 110, 112, and/or 114. The state profile may be stored as a block on the blockchain. A participant may observe the states of other participants in the supply chain over network(s) 108 or satellite 122); accepting input of information on a target product of the target company (Fig 4 # 406 receive input data at supply chain, [0063] At step 406, the system may receive input data from a step in the supply chain. For example, at Step #1 in the supply chain), included in a product of the downstream company, from the account of the downstream company ([0036]input data for processing a particular product/raw material in a supply chain. [0063], [0087] As a certain product is transmitted and processed from step to step in the supply chain, more states of each participant are recorded and linked to each other. For instance, when the product is delivered from the farm to a shipping company, a delivery state (e.g., CornDeliveryState) may be created. The CornDeliveryState data block may include objects such as ID, source of delivery, CI score, timestamp, and owner. In one example aspect, when the corn is moved from one step in the supply chain (e.g., farm) to the next step (e.g., shipper), a CI score is updated and/or assigned; registering the input information on the target product in association with information on the product of the downstream company ([0045] store certain “states” of products and manufacturing/processing techniques. For instance, a certain farm may have previously utilized a harvesting technique that relied on fossil fuels (state A). If the farm changes its harvesting technique to rely on renewable energy sources rather than fossil fuels, then its state may be updated and stored in memory 305 (state B). Further, memory 305 is configured to record the CI score of a product or products as they move through the supply chain., [0046] data collection module 315 may be configured to receive data associated with a farmer's cultivation practices, a machine's use of fossil fuels vs. renewable energy, a fermentation technique, types of vehicles involved in the shipping process (e.g., whether they are electric vehicles or combustion-engine driven), and the like., [0063] If the product of interest is corn, then certain inputs may be received by the system regarding the types of machinery the farmer is deploying to harvest the corn, which pesticides (if any) the farmer applied to the corn, and the soil composition in which the corn is grown. Such inputs may be captured as a “state” of the farmer in the supply chain. This state data may be received by the system at step 406. State data may be updated as the farmer's processes are updated.); and
Gruber discloses sending communication on the information on the target product to the target company as a destination ([0059] communications module 335 may be configured to communicate an updated CI score to a client device after a product completes processing at a certain step in the supply chain. The communications module 335 may also be configured to communicate a complete audit trail of the CI score evolution associated with a product, from farm to end-product. Communications module 335 may also communicate a value associated with a CI score, wherein the value may be captured in a CI token that may be exchangeable (traded, bought, and sold) by third parties in the carbon credit market.).
Gruber does not specifically teach accepting registration of a target company as a virtual company from an account of a downstream company positioned downstream of the target company in a supply chain
Asanuma (WO2022162714A1) teaches accepting registration of a target company as a virtual company from an account of a downstream company positioned downstream of the target company in a supply chain (Page 10 FIG. 13 is a flowchart of the registration processing procedure. As a prerequisite for starting the registration processing procedure, it is desirable that the registration processing unit 21 of the supply chain management device 1 routinely refers to the public information 5 and has already created a record of the node information 31 (FIG. 8). In step S201, the registration processing unit 21 of the supply chain management device 1 accepts an invitation from the host. Specifically, the registration processing unit 21 accepts an invitation from any terminal device 3 belonging to the host node. The invitation includes the host's own node ID and the guest's company name. Page 6 In a single invitation, the inviting node is called the "host" and the invited node is called the "guest". The host does not necessarily have to be located downstream of the guest. However, many nodes have a strong interest in the operational status of their upstream nodes (suppliers). Therefore, the host often located downstream of the guest. A host usually invites guests with whom he has a business relationship. However, the host can also invite guest with whom he or she does not currently have a business relationship); registering the input information on the target product in association with information on the product of the downstream company (Page 5 The public information 5 is information about each node 2 that can be freely obtained by the supply chain management device 1 via the network 4 . Many of the nodes 2 publish their own company outlines, product names, business relationships (supplier names, sales destination names), and the like. The relationship between products and parts is relative, and it is often the case that apart (e.g. engine) of one product (e.g. vehicle) is a product composed of other parts (e.g. cylinder). Similarly, the relationship between buyers and suppliers is also relative, and in many cases, one buyer (vehicle manufacturer)'s supplier (engine manufacturer) purchases parts from another supplier (cylinder manufacturer). The user of the supply chain management device 1 may perform input/output to/from the supply chain management device 1 from a remote location via the terminal device 3, or input/output to/from the input device 12 and the output device 13. Input/output may be performed directly. Page 7 the supply chain management device 1 may refer to the public information 5 and create a record of the node information 31 upon acceptance of the invitation.); and sending communication on the information on the target product to the target company as a destination. (Page 15 In step S271, the monitoring/inference processing unit 24 transmits an alarm. Specifically, the monitoring/inference processing unit 24 sends a warning to the terminal devices 3 belonging to the nodes N06 and N05. At this time, the monitoring/inference processing unit 24 may send a warning to the effect that "nodes N06 and N05 are likely to become non-operational" to the terminal device 3 that issued the request for monitoring. A similar warning may be sent to the terminal device 3 belonging to the node.)
Barford (US 2023/0252379 A1) teaches seek confirmation as to whether there is an error in the traceability-related information ([0008] using the first information to automatically and electronically communicate with a client computer system used by each of the plurality of suppliers, to invite each of the plurality of suppliers to verify that the first and/or second information received is correct; when at least one of the plurality of suppliers has verified, via its respective client computer system, the first and/or second information as correct, [0015] This provides flexibility and accuracy in the data model collection process, whereby, if the sender of the invitation has made an error, this can be corrected by the supplier when replying to the invitation., [0037] the automated process makes a determination as to whether the recipient (e.g., the battery manufacturer) verifies that the facility-to-facility supply chain relationship is true (e.g., that it is indeed the case that the battery manufacturer is a supplier to the smart phone manufacturer) and that the information provided by the smart phone manufacturer is correct (e.g., that the battery manufacturer does indeed supply batteries of the specified type as specified by the smart phone manufacturer).
JP2024-98776A (2023-01-11) discloses a method for centrally managing products made up of many different raw materials and simulating the environmental load of the product based on the greenhouse gas emissions generated during the product's life cycle. For example, if the target product is a cosmetic product, the raw material content database stores information such as the formulation of the raw materials that make up the target product, the source and amount of raw materials for each factory, the composition (structure, molecular formula) of the raw materials and the number of carbon atoms derived from plants in the molecule based on carbon neutrality, the amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during the production of the raw materials at the source of raw materials, the amount of GHG emissions associated with transportation from the source of raw materials to the factory, and the amount of GHG emissions derived from the raw materials when the raw materials are incinerated.
WO2023187928 discloses management of greenhouse gas emission amount in a fuel supply chain.
Xiu (US 20230419255A1) discloses the method involves obtaining a supplier list and sales information for multiple companies associated with a specified company for receipt of a search for a specified company. Purchased components and suppliers of the purchased components are traced by item category from supplier-buyer relationship in the supplier list to generate a supply web.
WO2019/0681178 discloses tracking emissions associated with an entity, and in particular, to systems and methods for tracking greenhouse gas emissions associated with an entity
CN115809951A discloses determining a product carbon footprint data by obtaining component identification code. A plurality of component identification code corresponding to a plurality of components (or further comprises raw material) to form the target product, the embodiment by imparting raw material, parts and so on unique identification code, based on identification analysis, through upstream and downstream enterprise carbon emission data.
Narasimhan (US 2022/0108252A1) discloses generating and surfacing sustainability insights and sustainability recommendations. Additional examples provide mechanisms for assisting with identifying best courses of action in relation to computing asset disposition, including factors that affect computing assets (e.g., data center power, cooling equipment). Prediction model generate projection for carbon footprint.
CN114387105A discloses a virtual resource management method and device, wherein the management method of the virtual resource comprises: receiving the virtual resource obtaining request, wherein the virtual resource obtaining request comprises account identification; obtaining the account active weight of the target account based on the account identifier; calculating the resource value to be allocated of the target account according to the account active weight and the preset allocation resource value
NPL, Blockchain enabled supply chain traceability in supply chain, 2021 discusses traceability to the upstream raw material and manufacturing network downstream.
However, the prior art fails to teach or suggest at least “in response to registering the information on the target product, generating, a temporary account for the virtual company and a storage area associated with the temporary account, allocating the storage area associated with the temporary account to the virtual company, and storing the information on the target product in the storage area allocated to the virtual company; after generating the temporary account for the virtual company; sending communication on the information on the target product to the target company as a destination the communication including a request to join the digital platform; creating a regular account corresponding to the target company in response to acquisition of notification of acceptance of joining the platform from the target company; and upon creating the regular account, reallocating the storage area allocated to the temporary account for the virtual company to the regular account for the target company.” The prior art teachings as recited above fail to set forth any sufficient rationale for combining or otherwise modifying any of the relevant prior art to arrive at the claimed invention, as a whole. Thus, the aforementioned combination of features claimed, as a whole, are not anticipated nor rendered obvious for any sufficient rationale by any of the prior art teachings. Furthermore, the prior art of record does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination of limitations for the dependent claims due to their respective dependencies to the independent claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Knipfer (US 2016/0358110) discloses system to determine an identifier for a product. A processor compares a plurality of attributes of the product to a hierarchical map of attributes. A processor determines a first portion of the identifier for the product based, at least in part, on a rule associated with the first attribute
Schoeneboom (US 2022/0108327 A1) discloses methods for determining the carbon footprint of a product in a production process in a production plant, in particular of a product in interconnected production processes
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SANGEETA BAHL whose telephone number is (571)270-7779. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 4PM.
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, Jessica Lemieux can be reached at 571-270-3445. 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.
/SANGEETA BAHL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626