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 .
Applicant is advised that the Notice of Allowance mailed 12/23/2025 is vacated. If the issue fee has already been paid, applicant may request a refund or request that the fee be credited to a deposit account. However, applicant may wait until the application is either found allowable or held abandoned. If allowed, upon receipt of a new Notice of Allowance, applicant may request that the previously submitted issue fee be applied. If abandoned, applicant may request refund or credit to a specified Deposit Account.
Status of Claims
This non-final office action is responsive to Applicant’s submission filed 09/18/2025. Currently, claims 2-25 are pending. Claims 2, 15 and 19 have been amended. Claim 25 is newly added. Claim 1 has been cancelled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-25 are allowed over prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
“None of the cited and/or relevant prior art, single or in combination, teaches the combination:
“generating, by one or more computing devices, a virtual fashion item model that virtually represents multi-dimensional attributes of a first category of actual items;
generating, by one or more computing devices, virtual representations of a first set of physical items each having different source information than at least one other physical item in the first set of physical items;
classifying, by the one or more computing devices, the first set of physical items together into the first category of actual items based on similarities between (i) multi-dimensional attributes of the virtual representations of the first physical items and (ii) the first virtual fashion item model of the first category of actual items; and
creating, by the one or more computing devices, sub-categories of items within the first category of actual items, wherein each sub-category includes a subset of the items that each have a same aspect that differentiates the sub-category from at least one other sub-category of the first category of actual items”,
as recited in claims 2, 15 and 19.
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 2-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
The claims recite method, system and computer program product for organizing and managing physical items in a closet.
Exemplary claim 2 recites in part,
“generating a fashion item model that represents multi-dimensional attributes of a first category of actual items;
generating a first silhouette representing the first category of actual items;
generating representations of a first set of physical items each having different source information than at least one other physical item in the first set of physical items;
classifying the first set of physical items together into the first category of actual items based on similarities between (i) multi-dimensional attributes of the representations of the first physical items and (ii) the fashion item model of the first category of actual items; and
creating sub-categories of items within the first category of actual items, wherein each sub-category includes a subset of the items that each have a same aspect that differentiates the sub-category from at least one other sub-category of the first category of actual items.”
The above limitations recite the steps of:
1) creating a fashion item model (e.g., a representation/drawing of clothing, that represents multi-dimensional attributes),
2) the human, using pen and paper, creating a silhouette (e.g., a silhouette of a jacket) to represent the category (e.g., the jacket category),
3) creating representations, (e.g., drawings), of a set of physical items that each have different source information (e.g., price, size, source image, and SKU) than at least one other physical item in the set,
4) organizing the set of items together into the category based on similarities between multi-dimensional attributes of the representations of the physical items and the fashion item model (e.g., item X is classified in the jacket category since its source image is of a blue leather jacket and size is indicated as a 6 which is similar to the fashion item model), and
creating sub-categories of items within the category (e.g., subcategories of blue jackets and red jackets within the jacket category).
The above limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas, enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III), in that they recite concepts that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper.
Additionally, the above limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, fall within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas, enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II), in that they recite managing personal behavior. The BRI of these limitations includes a human managing the contents of their closet.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of one or more computing devices. The additional computer-related elements merely invoke these additional elements as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and MPEP 2106.05(h).
Further, the claim recites the additional elements of the fashion item model being a virtual fashion item model and the representations of the first set of physical items being virtual representations. Limiting the application of the abstract idea to a virtual environment is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05(h).
In addition, the claim recites the additional element of storing the virtual fashion item model which merely adds insignificant extra-solution activity, i.e., data gathering, to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
The claim recites the additional element of outputting a user interface that includes a graphical depiction of the first silhouette representing the first category of actual items which merely adds insignificant extra-solution activity, i.e., data outputting, to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
When considered individually or in combination, the recited additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The recitation of additional elements is acknowledged as identified above. The discussion with respect to the practical application is equally applicable to consideration of whether the claims amount to significantly more. The additional computer-related elements merely invoke these additional elements as a tool to perform the abstract idea and generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and MPEP 2106.05(h). Limiting the application of the abstract idea to a virtual environment is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. See MPEP 2106.05(h). The steps of “storing data in memory” and “outputting a first silhouette on a graphical user interface”, while amounting to insignificant extra-solution activities, are well-understood, routine, and conventional computer functions. See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II).
Therefore, there are no meaningful recitations, considered in combination, that transform the judicial exception into a patent eligible application such that the claim amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Accordingly, claim 2 is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claims 15 and 19 recite similar limitations as set forth in claim 2, and therefore are rejected based on the same rationale.
Dependent claims 3-14, 16-18 and 20-25 recite limitations directed to the abstract idea, and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor amount to significantly more.
For example, claims 3, 4, 16, 17, 20 and 21 describe receiving user input (interaction) and updating the user interface in response to user input, which amounts to receiving and outputting (displaying) data. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
Claims 5-7, 13, 14 and 18 describes data gathering and organizing the gathered data into categories, which encompasses the identified abstract idea. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUSEGUN GOYEA whose telephone number is (571)270-5402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9am-5pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FAHD OBEID can be reached at 5712703324. 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.
/OLUSEGUN GOYEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights