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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/13/2025 has been entered.
Remarks
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites “A computer-implemented method for relation network data query, comprising: receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values; determining, from the multiple index blocks based on a correspondence between an index block and an edge data item, a first index block corresponding to the first edge data item, wherein the first index block comprises multiple data values of the first edge data item and location information of edges having the multiple data values and using the first node as starting nodes; asynchronously determining, using a plurality of threads, location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block; and directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried without traversing all edges of the first node”.
The limitations of “Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites an additional element – using “a computer” to perform the claimed steps. The “computer” in these steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as “a computer” performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The claim also recites the additional elements of “receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values” and “directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried without traversing all edges of the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d).
The claim does 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 using “a computer” to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The claim also recites the additional elements of “receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values” and “directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried without traversing all edges of the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from the storage, location information of the multiple index blocks associated with the first node” and “obtaining the first index block from the storage based on the location information” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “blocks associated with the first node, comprises: searching the storage for the first node; and elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein: the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a plurality of first edge data items and corresponding first data values; the plurality of first edge data items, respectively, correspond to a plurality of first index blocks; and determining location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block, and obtaining the edge to be queried from the storage based on the location information of the edge, comprises: respectively determining location information of edges having corresponding first data values from the plurality of first index blocks, to obtain a plurality of groups of edge location information, selecting an intersection set of the plurality of groups of edge location information, to obtain a location information intersection set, and additional elements of “obtaining the edge to be queried from the storage based on the location information intersection set” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining the edge to be queried from the storage based on the location information intersection set” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “comprises: respectively determining, through asynchronous query, the location information of the edges having the corresponding first data values from the plurality of first index blocks”. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “the data layer”. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “block corresponding to the first edge data item, comprises: respectively determining, from multiple index block groups, first index blocks corresponding to first edge data items; and determining location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block, and obtaining the edge to be queried from the storage based on the location information of the edge, comprises: respectively determining location information of edges having first data values from the first index blocks corresponding to the multiple data layers; and determining the edge to be queried based on the location information of the edges determined from the multiple data layers”. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from each data layer of the multiple data layers of the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node in a corresponding data layer, to obtain index block groups respectively corresponding to the multiple data layers” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from each data layer of the multiple data layers of the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node in a corresponding data layer, to obtain index block groups respectively corresponding to the multiple data layers” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites “A non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions executable by a computer system to perform one or more operations for relation network data query, comprising: receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values; determining, from the multiple index blocks based on a correspondence between an index block and an edge data item, a first index block corresponding to the first edge data item, wherein the first index block comprises multiple data values of the first edge data item and location information of edges having the multiple data values and using the first node as starting nodes; asynchronously determining, using a plurality of threads, location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block; and directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried, without traversing all edges of the first node”.
The limitations of “item, a first index block corresponding to the first edge data item, wherein the first index block comprises multiple data values of the first edge data item and location information of edges having the multiple data values and using the first node as starting nodes; asynchronously determining, using a plurality of threads, location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block; and
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites an additional element – using “a non-transitory, computer-readable medium” and “a computer system” to perform the claimed steps. The “non-transitory, computer-readable medium” and “computer system” in these steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as “a non-transitory, computer-readable medium” and “a computer system” performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The claim also recites the additional elements of “receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values” and “directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried, without traversing all edges of the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d).
The claim does 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 using “a non-transitory, computer-readable medium” and “a computer system” to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The claim also recites the additional elements of “receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values” and “directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried, without traversing all edges of the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from the storage, location information of the multiple index blocks associated with the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining the multiple index blocks associated with the first node based on the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining the multiple index blocks associated with the first node based on the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein: nodes in the storage are stored based on hash values; and searching the storage for the first node comprises: searching for the first node by using a hash value of the first node”. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “plurality of first index blocks; and determining location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block, and obtaining the edge to be queried from the storage based on the location information of the edge, comprises: respectively determining location information of edges having corresponding first data values from the plurality of first index blocks, to obtain a plurality of groups of edge location information, selecting an intersection set of the plurality of groups of edge location information, to obtain a location information intersection set, and elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining the edge to be queried from the storage based on the location information intersection set” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “be queried based on the location information of the edges determined from the multiple data layers”. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim also recites the additional elements of “wherein obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from each data layer of the multiple data layers of the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node in a corresponding data layer, to obtain index block groups respectively corresponding to the multiple data layers” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “wherein obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from each data layer of the multiple data layers of the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node in a corresponding data layer, to obtain index block groups respectively corresponding to the multiple data layers” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites “A computer-implemented system, comprising: one or more computers; and one or more computer memory devices interoperably coupled with the one or more computers and having tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable media storing one or more instructions that, when executed by the one or more computers, perform one or more operations for relation network data query, comprising: receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values; determining, from the multiple index blocks based on a correspondence between an index block and an edge data item, a first index block corresponding to the first edge data item, wherein the first index block comprises multiple data values of the first edge data item and location information of edges having the multiple data values and using the first node as starting nodes; asynchronously determining, using a plurality of threads, location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block; and directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried without traversing all edges of the first node”.
The limitations of “the first node as starting nodes; asynchronously determining, using a plurality of threads, location information of an edge having the corresponding first data value from the first index block; and
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites an additional element – using “a computer-implemented system, comprising: one or more computers; and one or more computer memory devices interoperably coupled with the one or more computers and having tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable media storing one or more instructions that, when executed by the one or more computers” to perform the claimed steps. The “computer-implemented system, comprising: one or more computers; and one or more computer memory devices interoperably coupled with the one or more computers and having tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable media storing one or more instructions that, when executed by the one or more computers” in these steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as “a computer-implemented system, comprising: one or more computers; and one or more computer memory devices interoperably coupled with the one or more computers and having tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable media storing one or more instructions that, when executed by the one or more computers” performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The claim also recites the additional elements of “receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values” and “directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried without traversing all edges of the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d).
The claim does 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 using “a computer-implemented system, comprising: one or more computers; and one or more computer memory devices interoperably coupled with the one or more computers and having tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable media storing one or more instructions that, when executed by the one or more computers” to perform the claimed steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The claim also recites the additional elements of “receiving a query request, wherein the query request is used to query for an edge to be queried using a first node as a starting node, wherein the edge to be queried satisfies a specified filter condition, and the specified filter condition comprises that the edge to be queried has a first edge data item and a corresponding first data value; obtaining, from a storage storing a relation network, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, wherein the storage is non-volatile, wherein the relation network comprises a plurality of nodes and a plurality of edges connecting the plurality of nodes, and wherein the plurality of edges comprise multiple edge data items and corresponding data values” and “directly obtaining, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, the edge to be queried without traversing all edges of the first node” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. In addition to any abstract ideas and additional elements in the parent claim(s), the claim recites “an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong One. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1), 2106.04(a)(2). This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from the storage, location information of the multiple index blocks associated with the first node” and “obtaining the first index block from the storage based on the location information” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Accordingly, any additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2A, Prong Two. See also MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim also recites the additional elements of “obtaining, from the storage, multiple index blocks associated with the first node, comprises: obtaining, from the storage, location information of the multiple index blocks associated with the first node” and “obtaining the first index block from the storage based on the location information” that are the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and/or output, and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). These additional elements cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible. See 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, Step 2B. See also MPEP 2106.05.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/22/2025 with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea because “the claims describe a method providing a technical improvement in data query efficiency when using a massive quantity of nodes and edges in the relation network” by using “a unique data structure with index blocks of the detree-1 edges associated with a node without a need to traverse all edges of the node” where “an edge to be queried can be directly obtained, based on the location information of the edge and from the storage, without traversing all edges of the first node” and that “[l]ocation information for an edge having data from an index block is determined and obtained to be queried from a storage, which is used to obtain a data item from the storage” (see applicant arguments, page 10). Applicant further argues that “may also be performed in any data layer, which also improves both data query and storage in a relation network” (see applicant arguments, page 11). Here applicant appear to be arguing under Step 2A, Prong One, that there is no abstract idea, however there is some discussion in their arguments that there is a technical improvement that would fall under Step 2A, Prong Two. Taking the abstract idea arguments first, the argued “unique data structure” and “determining” steps are steps that can be performed in the human mind, and such analysis and determining is often performed by those in the computer science area of algorithm analysis and data structures generally. The remaining steps of “receiving a query” and “obtaining” are not shown in the rejections above as being abstract ideas but are additional elements considered to be the insignificant extra-solution activity of data gathering and can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Therefore, the applicant’s argument the claims are not directed to an abstract idea are not convincing because there are abstract ideas in the claim.
Regarding the applicant arguments related to Step 2A, Prong Two, the argument that “a method providing a technical improvement in data query efficiency when using a massive quantity of nodes and edges in the relation network” (see applicant argument, page 10), there is nothing in the claim related to the quantity of nodes and edges and even if there was such a limitation a person of skill in the art could perform these steps given enough time. Regarding the further applicant argument that “may also be performed in any data layer, which also improves both data query and storage in a relation network” and “asserts that the claims are directed to a practical application for data query and storage in a relation network” (applicant arguments, page 11), it is not clear why these steps could not also be performed in the human mind or in the human mind using a pen and paper, since such algorithm design is commonly performed in the human mind. In addition, under Step 2A, Prong Two, an applicant must show how any the evaluate and determine is any additional elements in the claim, evaluated individually and in combination, integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations in MPEP 2106.04(d), 2106.05(a)-(c), (e)-(h). See MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(2), MPEP 2106.04(d). In their arguments the applicant has made no mention of the additional elements nor shown how they integrate the judicial exception into a practical application as required under Step 2A, Prong Two. Therefore, these arguments are not convincing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY A MORRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-7112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:00 pm ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Trujillo K James, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-3677. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/JAY A MORRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2151