DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-9 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
3. 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.
3.1 Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Is the claim directed to a statutory category?
Yes. The claims are to a system (claim 1), a method (claim 9) comprises a plurality of steps.
Step 2A- Prong One
The claim(s) recite(s) a system (claim 1), a method (claim 9), comprising: The step that “executes classification based on the setting, “executes a scenario analysis process of calculating, for each of combinations of the time steps and the clusters, a transition probability at which the index vectors belonging to the cluster in the time step transition to each group in the final time step and a cluster in which the index vectors belonging to the cluster in the time step are transmissible in a subsequent step”, under the broadest reasonable interpretation fall under a mathematical concept / mathematical relationship or otherwise a mental process. Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea, by use of generic computer components and thus are clearly directed to an abstract idea, as constructed.
Step 2A Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitation such as: “a processor, a memory, and a display device”, either alone or in combination, all serve to gather and process data and do not add anything more significantly to the judicial exception, but are mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component that are well known, routine, and conventional activities (see specification at para [0032-0035], and fig.1) which can be of any type, including general-purpose computer (pages 6-10) previously known in the industries. Merely adding a programmable computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice, 573 U.S. at 223-24. Furthermore, the use of a general-purpose computer to apply an otherwise ineligible algorithm does not qualify as a particular machine. See Ultramerciallnc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772F.3d 709, 716-17 (Fed. Cir. 20l4); In re TLI Commc 'ns LLC v. AV Automotive, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mere recitation of concrete or tangible components is not an inventive concept); Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 785; the step of: “receives a setting for classifying the clusters of a final time step of the plurality of scenarios into a plurality of groups”, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, reasonable fall under data gathering and processing activities that are pre-solution activities” and the step of: “displays an analysis map including a display representing the transition probability and a display representing the transmissible cluster on the display device for each of the combinations of the time steps and the clusters” could amount to insignificant post-solution activities that are also well-known, routine and conventional activities and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (See further MPEP 2106.05(d)(i-iv)-f); thus are not patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
Step 2B
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as previously discussed above with reference to the integration of abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of: “a processor, a memory, and a display device”, either alone or in combination, all serve to gather and process data and do not add anything more significantly to the judicial exception, but are mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component that are well known, routine, and conventional activities (see specification at para [0032-0035], and fig.1) which can be of any type, including general-purpose computer (pages 6-10) previously known in the industries. Merely adding a programmable computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice, 573 U.S. at 223-24. Furthermore, the use of a general-purpose computer to apply an otherwise ineligible algorithm does not qualify as a particular machine. See Ultramerciallnc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772F.3d 709, 716-17 (Fed. Cir. 20l4); In re TLI Commc 'ns LLC v. AV Automotive, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mere recitation of concrete or tangible components is not an inventive concept); Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 785; the step of: “receives a setting for classifying the clusters of a final time step of the plurality of scenarios into a plurality of groups”, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, reasonable fall under data gathering and processing activities that are pre-solution activities” and the step of: “displays an analysis map including a display representing the transition probability and a display representing the transmissible cluster on the display device for each of the combinations of the time steps and the clusters” could amount to insignificant post-solution activities that are also well-known, routine and conventional activities and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (See further MPEP 2106.05(d)(i-iv)-f); thus are not patent eligible under 35 USC 101. Therefore, using computer components amount to no more than mere instructions to perform the abstract, and thus are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited abstract, as constructed.
3.2 Dependent claims 2-8 merely include limitations pertaining to: (claim 2), “wherein the processor displays a circular graph in which the transition probability is indicated by an area ratio on the display device” (WURC post-solution activities). (claim 3); “wherein the memory stores information indicating a display color corresponding to each of the plurality of groups” (WURC post-solution activities), and “the processor calculates a mixed color in which the display colors corresponding to the plurality of groups are mixed based on the transition probability corresponding to each of the plurality of groups in each of the combinations of the time steps and the clusters” (mathematical concept), and “displays a display representing the transition probability with the mixed color on the display device” (WURC post-solution activities); (claim 4); “wherein the processor receives a setting of a junction point which is based on the combination of the time step and the cluster and a plurality of junction destinations corresponding to the junction point by selecting the display representing the transition probability for each of the combinations of the time steps and the clusters, each of the plurality of junction destinations corresponding to the junction point is one of the plurality of groups in the final time step or one of junction points after the junction point” (pre-solution data gathering and processing), “the processor displays a display representing the junction point and a display representing the plurality of junction destinations corresponding to the junction point on the display device” (WURC post-solution activities); (claim 5); “wherein the processor receives a selection of the junction point and one of the plurality of junction destinations corresponding to the junction point, executes a factor analysis process on the selected junction point and junction destination, in the factor analysis process” (pre-solution data gathering and processing), “executes sensitivity analysis using the index vector at the junction point as a reference and calculates an influence of an index for shifting from the junction point to the junction destination” (mathematical concept); “and displays a display representing the calculated influence on the display device” (WURC post-solution activities); (claim 6) “wherein the memory stores initial values of the index vectors, and input information defined by an edge representing a casual relation between nodes which are indexes included in the index vectors, , stores a result of the executed simulation in the simulation result” (pre-solution data gathering and storage), “and the processor executes the simulation based on the initial values and the input information”, “, in each time step of the simulation, generates a plurality of index vectors in the time step based on index vector values in a time step immediately before the time step and the input information, generates the plurality of clusters in the time step by clustering the plurality of generated index vectors based on a predetermined algorithm, and resamples the scenarios by resampling the index vectors included in each of the plurality of generated clusters based on a predetermined algorithm” (mathematical concept or otherwise a mental process); (claim 7) “wherein the processor receives a group change instruction for the clusters of the final time step of the plurality of scenarios included in the plurality of groups” (pre-solution data gathering), “executes group resetting that classifies the final time step of the plurality of scenarios into the plurality of groups based on the group change instruction, executes again the scenario analysis process on the plurality of groups set in the group resetting” (mathematical concept or otherwise a mental process), “and displays the analysis map on the display device based on a result of the scenario analysis process” (WURC post-solution activities), (claim 8) “wherein the memory stores an initial value of each index included in the index vector” (pre-solution data gathering), “and the processor calculates a value representing a change ratio from the initial value of each index included in the index vector of the plurality of clusters of the final time step,” (mathematical concept), “and displays a display representing the change ratio of each index in each of the plurality of clusters and a display for receiving the group change instruction” (WURC post-solution activities); all of which further amount to further mathematical concept and/or mental process similar to that already recited by the independent claims and already addressed above and thus are further not patent eligible under 35 USC 101.
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
4.1 Boneti et al. (USPG_PUB No. 2014/0303949) teaches a simulation of production systems based at least in part on a portion of the information and at least a portion of the network model to generate simulation results.
4.2 White (USPG_PUB No. 2023/0409903) teaches methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on a computer storage medium, for generating a simulation of an environment that is being interacted with by a plurality of agents over a plurality of time steps, wherein the simulation comprises a respective simulation state for each time step that specifies a respective state of each agent at the time step.
4.3 Vasan et al. (USPG_PUB No. 2009/0303887) teaches a method and system for timestep stochastic simulation for networks.
4.4 Dolan (U.S. Patent No. 11,808,582) teaches techniques associated with improving performance and realism of simulation instances associated with simulation testing of autonomous vehicles.
5. Claims 1-9 are rejected and this action is non-final. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE PIERRE-LOUIS whose telephone number is (571)272-8636. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:00 PM.
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, EMERSON C PUENTE can be reached at 571-272-3652. 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.
/ANDRE PIERRE LOUIS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187 September 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights