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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-16 and 20-23 are pending. Claims 1, 13 and 20 are amended. Claims 17-19 are cancelled. Claims 21-23 are new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 07/08/2026, with respect to the 101 rejection has been considered but is not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on pages 15-17, that the claims cannot be grouped as certain methods organizing human activity. Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to recite specific technical operations (optimization model comprises a machine learning model) and that a human cannot iteratively train a machine learning model nor can a human process vehicle operation constraints, such as fuel emissions constraints, power consumption thresholds, and performance capabilities associated with one or more vehicle systems of the vehicle, through a machine learning model to generate SVF mixing ratios. Applicant also argues that the claims are similar to Ollnova technologies and unlike Electric Power group.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim limitations as drafted, recite a concept, that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, is a certain method of organizing human activity. The limitations are analogous to managing personal behavior or interactions between people (interactions between people), or a commercial or legal interaction (sales activity) such as scheduling a reservation for a fueling of a vehicle, generating a profile based on purchase history and determining an optimization of the fuel mixture based on various factors (see specification, Par. 0006-008). The generic computer implementations do not change the character of the limitations. The additional elements (computer elements and devices, machine learning model, interactive dashboard, blockchain, manipulating pixels and executing applications, etc) are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea. Furthermore, with respect to Ollnova technologies, the claims were considered eligible because they did not recite an abstract idea. Here, the claims do recite an abstract idea as explained above and are similar to electric power group in that the result is a displaying of data on a dashboard.
Applicant argues, on pages 17-18, that the claimed invention is integrated into a practical application. Applicant argues that the claims address the technical challenge of optimizing fuel mixing ratios for vehicles with different operational constraints. This is a problem that requires processing physical and technical parameters (fuel emissions constraints, power consumption thresholds, performance capabilities) that are inherent to the vehicle systems themselves. Applicant argues that the machine learning model improves accuracy and efficiency. Applicants argue that that the claims improve technical functioning of the SVF system. Applicant argues that unlike trading tech the present claims provide a concrete improvement to the models technical performance, no merely improved information display.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, the additional elements (computer elements and devices, machine learning model, interactive dashboard, blockchain, manipulating pixels and executing applications, etc) are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea. Furthermore, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology. For example, in Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the court determined that the claimed user interface simply provided a trader with more information to facilitate market trades, which improved the business process of market trading but did not improve computers or technology. Here, the alleged improvement to optimizing fuel mixing ratios is an improvement business process or interactions between people and not a technology or technical field and there are no improvements to the technology of machine learning or technical functioning of a system.
Applicant argues, on page 18, that the claims are similar to eligible claim 3 of example 47 and claim 2 of example 48.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As mentioned above, the claims do not provide an improvement to a technology or technical field such as examples give. Instead, the alleged improvement to accuracy and efficiency of SVF mixing ratio determinations utilizing a generic optimization model and machine learning does not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Therefore, the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Applicant argues, on page 19, that the claimed invention recites significantly more that any alleged abstract idea.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies in 2B. The additional elements, when considered separately and in combination, do not add significantly more to the exception. They are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. Therefore, the claims are ineligible.
Novelty/Non-Obviousness
The closest prior art of record is included in the previous action mailed on 06/17/2025. The claims would be considered allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections in this office action.
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 1-16 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-12 and 21-23 are directed to a series of steps, and therefore is a process.
Claims 13-16 are directed to a system with multiple components, and therefore is a machine.
Claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable media and therefore are an article of manufacture.
Independent Claims
Step 2A Prong One
The limitation of Claim 1 recites:
requesting, …, one or more portions of SVF supplier source data from …one or more SVF suppliers;
aggregating, …, the one or more portions of SVF supplier source data;
receiving, …, a request to display a current SVF availability from …, wherein the request to display the current SVF availability is associated with a user profile associated with the vehicle, wherein the request to display the current SVF availability comprises one or more portions of data related to a trip plan to be performed by the vehicle;
in response to receiving the request to display the current SVF availability:
causing, …, rendering of the current SVF availability … of the vehicle …, wherein the current SVF availability is based at least in part on the one or more portions of SVF supplier source data, wherein causing rendering of the current SVF availability … comprises:
…; and
configuring a set of interactive pixels of … based on a hardware specification…;
receiving, …, a request to schedule an SVF fueling reservation from …, wherein the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation is associated with the user profile associated with the vehicle, …;
in response to receiving the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation:
causing, …, transmission of one or more portions of data related to the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation … associated with a respective SVF supplier of the one or more SVF suppliers;
receiving, …, a confirmation of the SVF fueling reservation from …; and
causing, …, rendering of the confirmation of the SVF fueling reservation …;
generating, …, one or more portions of user profile data associated with the user profile associated with the vehicle, wherein the one or more portions of user profile data comprise data related to at least one of a user search history related to one or more searches executed …, a user purchase history associated with one or more purchases of SVF made by the user profile, a user trip history associated with one or more prior trip plans executed by the user profile;
causing, …, storage of at least the user purchase history associated with the one or more portions of user profile data …;
determining, …, a suggested SVF mixing ratio, wherein the … based in part on data related to one or more vehicles and one or more SVF suppliers associated with the SVF system, wherein the suggested SVF mixing ratio is generated based in part on the trip plan, one or more vehicle operation constraints associated with the vehicle, and the one or more portions of user profile data;
determining, …, a suggested travel hub offering SVF at a lowest cost relative to one or more alternative travel hubs offering SVF, wherein the suggested travel hub is determined based in part on the trip plan and the one or more portions of user profile data;
determining, … and based in part on the one or more portions of user profile data, at least one of a carbon offset or a carbon credit associated with the user profile, wherein determining the at least one of the carbon offset or the carbon credit comprises verifying the user purchase history stored on the …; and
causing, …, rendering of least one of the suggested SVF mixing ratio, the suggested travel hub, the at least one of the carbon offset or the carbon credit, or the one or more portions of user profile data … .
The limitations of Claim 13 recites:
request, …, one or more portions of SVF supplier source data from … one or more SVF suppliers;
aggregate, …, the one or more portions of SVF supplier source data;
receive, …, a request to display a current SVF availability from …, wherein the request to display the current SVF availability is associated with a user profile associated with the vehicle, wherein the request to display the current SVF availability comprises one or more portions of data related to a trip plan to be performed by the vehicle;
in response to receiving the request to display the current SVF availability:
cause, …, rendering of the current SVF availability …, wherein the current SVF availability is based at least in part on the one or more portions of SVF supplier source data, wherein causing rendering of the current SVF availability … comprises:
…
configuring a set of interactive pixels … based on a hardware specification …;
receive, …, a request to schedule an SVF fueling reservation from …, wherein the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation is associated with the user profile associated with the vehicle, …;
in response to receiving the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation:
cause, …, transmission of one or more portions of data related to the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation … a respective SVF supplier of the one or more SVF suppliers;
receive, …, a confirmation of the SVF fueling reservation from …; and
cause, …, rendering of the confirmation of the SVF fueling reservation …;
generate, …, one or more portions of user profile data associated with the user profile associated with the vehicle, wherein the one or more portions of user profile data comprise data related to at least one of a user search history related to one or more searches executed …, a user purchase history associated with one or more purchases of SVF made by the user profile, a user trip history associated with one or more prior trip plans executed by the user profile;
cause, …, storage of at least the user purchase history associated with the one or more portions of user profile data …;
determine, …, a suggested SVF mixing ratio, wherein the … based in part on data related to one or more vehicles and one or more SVF suppliers associated with the SVF system, wherein the suggested SVF mixing ratio is generated based in part on the trip plan, one or more vehicle operation constraints associated with the vehicle, and the one or more portions of user profile data;
determine, … a suggested travel hub offering SVF at a lowest cost relative to one or more alternative travel hubs offering SVF, wherein the suggested travel hub is determined based in part on the trip plan and the one or more portions of user profile data;
determine, … and based in part on the one or more portions of user profile data, at least one of a carbon offset or a carbon credit associated with the user profile, wherein determining the at least one of the carbon offset or the carbon credit comprises verifying the user purchase history stored …; and
cause, … rendering of least one of the suggested SVF mixing ratio, the suggested travel hub, the at least one of the carbon offset or the carbon credit, or the one or more portions of user profile data … .
The limitations of Claim 20 recites:
request, …, one or more portions of SVF supplier source data from …one or more SVF suppliers;
aggregate, …, the one or more portions of SVF supplier source data;
receive, …, a request to display a current SVF availability from …, wherein the request to display the current SVF availability is associated with a user profile associated with the vehicle, wherein the request to display the current SVF availability comprises one or more portions of data related to a trip plan to be performed by the vehicle;
in response to receiving the request to display the current SVF availability:
cause, …, rendering of the current SVF availability …, wherein the current SVF availability is based at least in part on the one or more portions of SVF supplier source data, wherein causing rendering of the current SVF … comprises:
…; and
configuring a set of interactive pixels … based on a hardware specification …;
receive, …, a request to schedule an SVF fueling reservation from …, wherein the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation is associated with the user profile associated with the vehicle, …;
in response to receiving the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation:
cause, …, transmission of one or more portions of data related to the request to schedule the SVF fueling reservation to … a respective SVF supplier of the one or more SVF suppliers;
receive, …, a confirmation of the SVF fueling reservation from …; and
cause, …, rendering of the confirmation of the SVF fueling reservation …;
generate, …, one or more portions of user profile data associated with the user profile associated with the vehicle, wherein the one or more portions of user profile data comprise data related to at least one of a user search history related to one or more searches executed …, a user purchase history associated with one or more purchases of SVF made by the user profile, a user trip history associated with one or more prior trip plans executed by the user profile;
cause, …, storage of at least the user purchase history associated with the one or more portions of user profile data …;
determine, …, a suggested SVF mixing ratio, wherein the … based in part on data related to one or more vehicles and one or more SVF suppliers associated with the SVF system, wherein the suggested SVF mixing ratio is generated based in part on the trip plan, one or more vehicle operation constraints associated with the vehicle, and the one or more portions of user profile data;
determine,…, a suggested travel hub offering SVF at a lowest cost relative to one or more alternative travel hubs offering SVF, wherein the suggested travel hub is determined based in part on the trip plan and the one or more portions of user profile data;
determine, … and based in part on the one or more portions of user profile data, at least one of a carbon offset or a carbon credit associated with the user profile, wherein determining the at least one of the carbon offset or the carbon credit comprises verifying the user purchase history stored …; and
cause, …, rendering of least one of the suggested SVF mixing ratio, the suggested travel hub, the at least one of the carbon offset or the carbon credit, or the one or more portions of user profile data … .
The claim limitations as drafted, recite a concept, that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, is a certain method of organizing human activity. The limitations are analogous to managing personal behavior or interactions between people (interactions between people), or a commercial or legal interaction (sales activity) such as scheduling a reservation for a fueling of a vehicle, generating a profile based on purchase history and determining an optimization of the fuel mixture based on various factors (see specification, Par. 0006-008). The generic computer implementations (see below) do not change the character of the limitations. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the following additional elements:
Claim 1:
Computer
Sustainable vehicle fuel system (SVF)
SVF supplier related computing devices
a vehicle related computing device associated with a vehicle
wherein the vehicle related computing device is configured to generate the request to schedule an SVF fueling reservation based on a manipulation of the set of interactive pixels of the interactive SVF dashboard
rendering… via an interactive dashboard
blockchain enabled data store
SVF optimization model of the SVF system
SVF optimization model comprises a machine learning model that is iteratively retrained
initiating execution of a vehicle related computing application of the vehicle related computing device, wherein the vehicle related computing application is configured to render the interactive SVF dashboard
Claim 13:
An apparatus comprising:
at least one processor; and
at least one non-transitory memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to:
Sustainable vehicle fuel system (SVF)
SVF supplier related computing devices
a vehicle related computing device associated with a vehicle
wherein the vehicle related computing device is configured to generate the request to schedule an SVF fueling reservation based on a manipulation of the set of interactive pixels of the interactive SVF dashboard
rendering… via an interactive dashboard
blockchain enabled data store
SVF optimization model of the SVF system
SVF optimization model comprises a machine learning model that is iteratively retrained
initiating execution of a vehicle related computing application of the vehicle related computing device, wherein the vehicle related computing application is configured to render the interactive SVF dashboard
Claim 20:
A computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having computer program code stored thereon that, in execution with at least one processor, is configured to:
Sustainable vehicle fuel system (SVF)
SVF supplier related computing devices
a vehicle related computing device associated with a vehicle
wherein the vehicle related computing device is configured to generate the request to schedule an SVF fueling reservation based on a manipulation of the set of interactive pixels of the interactive SVF dashboard
rendering… via an interactive dashboard
blockchain enabled data store
SVF optimization model of the SVF system
SVF optimization model comprises a machine learning model that is iteratively retrained
initiating execution of a vehicle related computing application of the vehicle related computing device, wherein the vehicle related computing application is configured to render the interactive SVF dashboard
These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B. The additional elements, when considered separately and in combination, do not add significantly more to the exception. They are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible.
Dependent Claims
Step 2A Prong One
Dependent claims 2-12 and 21-23 and 14-19 further narrow the recite the same abstract ideas recited in Claims 1 and 13, respectively. Therefore, claims 2-12 and 21-23 and 14-19 are directed to an abstract idea for the reasons given above.
Step 2A Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the dependent claims recite the following additional elements:
Claim 2
Electronic display
Claim 11
One or more computing devices associated with the user profile
Claim 14
Electronic display
Claim 22
API calls
Claim 23
Interactive map
These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B. The additional elements, when considered separately and in combination, do not add significantly more to the exception. They are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible.
Conclusion
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 ISMAIL A MANEJWALA whose telephone number is (571)272-8904. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Nathan Uber can be reached on 571-270-3923. 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.
/ISMAIL A MANEJWALA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628
