DETAILED ACTION
This rejection is in response to Amendments filed 02/26/2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 17, filed 02/26/2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 2, 5, 10, 12, 16, and 18 and 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection to claims 1-7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 2, 5, 10, 12, 16, and 18 and 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection to claims 1-7 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 02/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to applicant’s arguments on pages 17-20 of remarks filed 02/26/2026 that the claims are patent eligible because the claims improve the efficiency of the computer by resulting in more accurate determinations, conserving bandwidth by performing increased frequency of determining until the trip is near its beginning, and conserving computational resources by generating more relevant instructions, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
If it is asserted that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. The specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, but it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies a technical problem and explains the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. See MPEP § 2106.05(a).
To show that the involvement of a computer assists in improving the technology, the claims must recite the details regarding how a computer aids the method, the extent to which the computer aids the method, or the significance of a computer to the performance of the method. Merely adding generic computer components to perform the method is not sufficient. Thus, the claim must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(a)(II) and 2106.05(f).
It is unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art how technology is improved by providing accurate determinations, performing increased frequency of determining until the trip is near its beginning, and generating more relevant instructions. The accuracy and relevancy of the determinations or instructions may improve a commercial problem, but not a problem rooted in technology. Applicant’s specification recites:
[0001]: The proliferation of mobile apps appearing on customers’ devices is overwhelming consumers. It seems there is an app for every conceivable purpose, with most being individual apps that either share some common functionalities or uniquely cater to specific needs. Due to privacy and/or security concerns, these apps typically do not share data with others unless they belong to the same family of company apps. The lack of data sharing between apps highlights the shortcomings of a fully integrated personal device capable of comprehensively understanding individual profiles, preferences, current and upcoming activities, personal health conditions, and similar information within family circles. This integration could enable the automatic recommendation of personalized content and the resolution of needs in a timely manner. Without such integration, we continue to rely on human memory to remember and manually connect and correlate information around us.
[0072]: Prior to initiation of the activity, the processor can periodically determine whether a change in the weather, a change in an environment associated with a destination, or a change in the activity occurred. For example, the processor can monitor the changes at increasing frequency as the commencement of the activity approaches. Initially, the processor can monitor the changes every week more than a month prior to the activity, every day a week before the activity, or every hour in the last 2 days before the activity. Upon determining that the change in the weather, the change in the environment, or the change in the activity occurred, the processor can determine a second item that can address the change in the weather, the change in the environment, or the change in the activity. For example, if the forecast changes to rain, the processor can determine that a rain jacket is needed. The processor can determine whether the second item is among the multiple items. Upon determining that the second item is not among the multiple items, the processor can determine whether the second item can be obtained prior to the initiation of the activity, for example, by purchasing or renting the second item. Upon determining that the second item can be obtained prior to the initiation of the activity, the processor can provide instructions to obtain the second item. Upon determining that the second item cannot be obtained prior to the initiation of the activity, the processor can suggest canceling the activity.
The specification does not set forth an improvement to technology but rather emphasizes improving the recommendation rather than technology by providing a more personalized recommendation. The specification does not provide further detail on how an increased frequency of determining improves technology. The increased frequency of determining is merely described as the period of monitoring changes to recommend the item rather than an improvement to technology. Therefore, the claims do not include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery and do not qualify as an improvement to an existing technology.
With respect to applicant’s arguments on pages 20-24 of remarks filed 02/26/2026 that the Hasan does not teach the claim amendments (e.g. telecommunications signals base stations, increasing frequency, and damaged condition), Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The prior art rejection to claims 1-7 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim amendments to claims 8-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 recite: prior to the start date, periodically determining, by the personal assistant, whether at least one of (i) a change in weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) a change in an environment associated with the destination…; and in response to determining that least one of (i) the change in weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) the change in an environment associated with the destination, rendering said claims indefinite because it is unclear whether weather forecast and an environment recited in independent claims 1, 8, and 14 are the same or different from the subsequent recitation of weather forecast and an environment in in claims 1, 8, and 14. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claims 2, 10, and 16 recite: upon determining that the change in weather forecast… determining a second item that can address the change in weather forecast, rendering said claims indefinite because it is unclear whether weather forecast and an environment recited in independent claims 1, 8, and 14 are the same or different from the subsequent recitation of weather forecast in in claims 2, 10, and 16. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claims 1 and 8 recite: cause display, by the personal assistant, of the instruction on the mobile device/UE, rendering said claims indefinite because it is unclear what is being performed. It is clear that the display of the instruction is not required by a potential infringer, but merely the causing of the display of the instruction. But what does that entail? When is the display “caused”? How is it “caused”? What is the scope? Appropriate correction of clarification is required.
There is insufficient antecedent basis in the following limitations:
Claims 1, 8, and 14 recite: the change
Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Under Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test, it must be considered whether the claims are directed to one of the four statutory classes of invention. See MPEP § 2106. In the instant case, claims 1-7 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage media, claims 8-13 are directed to a method, and claims 14-20 are directed towards a system which falls within one of the four statutory categories of invention(process/apparatus). Accordingly, the claims will be further analyzed under revised step 2:
Under step 2A (prong 1) of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test, it must be considered whether the claims recite a judicial exception if so, then determine in Prong Two if the recited judicial exception is integrated into a practical application of that exception. If the claim recites a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea), the claim requires further analysis in Prong Two. One of the enumerated groupings of abstract ideas is defined as certain methods of organizing human activity that includes fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2).
Regarding representative independent claim 1, recites the abstract idea of:
obtain, by a personal assistant… ;
based on the analysis, determine, by the personal assistant, an indication of an upcoming trip. a start indicator associated with a start date for the upcoming trip, an end indicator associated with an end date for the upcoming trip. a destination associated with the upcoming trip, and an activity associated with the destination;
prior to the start date, periodically determine, by the personal assistant, whether at least one of (i) a change in a weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) a change in an environment associated with the destination, or (iii) a change in the activity has occurred, wherein the periodic determining occurs with increasing frequency as a current date approaches the start date, and wherein the periodic determining is performed…;
in response to determining that least one of (i) the change in weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) the change in an environment associated with the destination, or (iii) the change in the activity has occurred, determine, by the personal assistant, an item addressing the change;
based on a multiplicity of items from a purchasing history associated with a user of the mobile device, determine, by the personal assistant, whether the user is in possession of the item;
upon determining that the user is not in possession of the item, generate, by the personal assistant, an instruction for obtaining the item by:
determining,… , (i) a personal preference of the user and (ii) a budget associated with the user,
identifying a link to an external site for obtaining the item, wherein the external site is included in the personal preference and offers the item in accordance with the budget, …
upon determining that the user is in possession of the item, generate, by the personal assistant, an instruction for replacing the item by: capturing, …, an image representing a condition of the item, determining the item is in a damaged condition by comparing the image to a predetermined standard for replacing the item, and
in response to the determining. (i) generating, by the personal assistant, the instruction for replacing the item and (ii) providing. by the personal assistant, the instruction …
The above-recited limitations amounts to certain methods of organizing human activity associated with sales activities and commercial interactions related to determining items for user to purchase based on an upcoming trip, weather forecast, items needed for upcoming trip, and items the user possesses and does not possess, and providing the link to purchase th items. Such concepts have been considered ineligible certain methods of organizing human activity by the Courts. See MPEP § 2106.
The Step 2A (prong 2) of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test, is the next step in the eligibility analyses and looks at whether the abstract idea is integrated into a practical application. This requires an additional element or combination of additional elements in the claims to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. See MPEP § 2106.
In this instance, the claims recite the additional elements such as:
One or more non-transitory, computer-readable storage media comprising instructions recorded thereon, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one data processor of a system, cause the system to:… by … associated with a mobile device,…; a first set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the mobile device via a first base station of a wireless telecommunication network: provide, as input, the first set of telecommunication signals to a large language model (LLM) included in the personal assistant, wherein the LLM generates, as output, an analysis of text included in the first set of telecommunication signals; … via a second base station of the wireless telecommunication network;… based on a second set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the mobile device via a third base station of the wireless telecommunication network;… using a scanner of the mobile device; …and including the link in the instruction;… to the mobile device. wherein the mobile device displays the instruction to the user (Claim 1);
the Internet (Claims 7 and 20);
a user equipment (UE) operating on a wireless telecommunication network, a first set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the UE via a first base station of the wireless telecommunication network;… based on a second set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the UE via a third base station of the wireless telecommunication network; and including the link in the instruction; and cause display, by the personal assistant, of the instruction on the UE (Claims 8 & 14);
the UE operating on the wireless telecommunication network (Claims 11 & 13 );
A system comprising: at least one hardware processor; and at least one non-transitory memory storing instructions, which, when executed by the at least one hardware processor, cause the system to:… (Claim 14);
the UE operating on the wireless telecommunication network (Claims 17 and 19).
However, these elements do not amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
Independent claims and dependent claims also fail to recite elements which amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. For example, independent claims and dependent claims are directed to the abstract idea itself and do not amount to an integration according to any one of the considerations above.
Step 2B is the next step in the eligibility analyses and evaluates whether the claims recite additional elements that amount to an inventive concept (i.e., “significantly more”) than the recited judicial exception. According to Office procedure, revised Step 2A overlaps with Step 2B, and thus, many of the considerations need not be re-evaluated in Step 2B because the answer will be the same. See MPEP § 2106.
In Step 2A, several additional elements were identified as additional limitations:
One or more non-transitory, computer-readable storage media comprising instructions recorded thereon, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one data processor of a system, cause the system to:… by … associated with a mobile device,…; a first set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the mobile device via a first base station of a wireless telecommunication network: provide, as input, the first set of telecommunication signals to a large language model (LLM) included in the personal assistant, wherein the LLM generates, as output, an analysis of text included in the first set of telecommunication signals; … via a second base station of the wireless telecommunication network;… based on a second set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the mobile device via a third base station of the wireless telecommunication network;… using a scanner of the mobile device; …and including the link in the instruction;… to the mobile device. wherein the mobile device displays the instruction to the user (Claim 1);
the Internet (Claims 7 and 20);
a user equipment (UE) operating on a wireless telecommunication network, a first set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the UE via a first base station of the wireless telecommunication network;… based on a second set of telecommunication signals transmitted to the UE via a third base station of the wireless telecommunication network; and including the link in the instruction; and cause display, by the personal assistant, of the instruction on the UE (Claims 8 & 14);
the UE operating on the wireless telecommunication network (Claims 11 & 13 );
A system comprising: at least one hardware processor; and at least one non-transitory memory storing instructions, which, when executed by the at least one hardware processor, cause the system to:… (Claim 14);
the UE operating on the wireless telecommunication network (Claims 17 and 19).
These additional limitations, including the limitations in the independent claims and dependent claims, do not amount to an inventive concept because the recitations above do not amount to an improvement in the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. In addition, they were already analyzed under Step 2A and did not amount to a practical application of the abstract idea.
For these reasons, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 8-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by Hasan (US Patent No. 10,460,464 B1, hereinafter “Hasan”) in view of Kher (US Pub. No. 20250202777 A1, hereinafter “Kher”) in further view of Akutagawa et al. (US Pub. No. 20200279339 A1, hereinafter “Akutagawa”).
Regarding claim 8
A method comprising: (Hasan, C2, L30-55: method):
obtaining, by a personal assistant associated a user equipment (UE) operating on a wireless telecommunication network a first set of …signals transmitted to the UE… (Hasan, C2, L55-67: determine a trip is planned and make packing recommendation; C3, L1-10: obtain travel information and destination information; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates, duration, destination, travel plans, and luggage being checked in; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant; C4, L35-45: any combination of wireless network; C21, L20-30: any type of telecommunication network);
based on the first set of …signals, determining, by the personal assistant, an indication of an upcoming trip, a start indicator associated with a start date for the upcoming trip, an end indicator associated with an end date for the upcoming trip, a destination associated with the upcoming trip, and an activity associated with the destination (Hasan, C2, L55-67: determine a trip is planned and make packing recommendation; C3, L1-10: obtain travel information and destination information; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates, duration, destination, travel plans, mode of transportation, and luggage being checked in; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant; C4, L35-45: any combination of wireless network; C21, L20-30: any type of telecommunication network);
prior to the start date, periodically determining, by the personal assistant, whether at least one of (i) a change in weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) a change in an environment associated with the destination, or (iii) a change in the activity has occurred, wherein the periodic determining occurs …as a current date approaches the start date, and wherein the periodic determining is performed…, and in response to determining that least one of (i) the change in weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) the change in an environment associated with the destination, or (iii) the change in the activity has occurred, determine, by the personal assistant, an item addressing the change (Hasan, C3, L1-10: obtain weather information and travel information for the destination and suggest items to purchase that are appropriate for the weather at the destination; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant; C2, L40-67: traveler prepares for travel by opening suitcase to pack items needed during the planned travel; C19, L1-45: recommend items that can be delivered prior to start of travel; C8, L35-60: receive updated notification when there is a change in weather which is used to update item recommendation based on the change in weather);
based on a multiplicity of items from a purchasing history associated with a user of the UE, determining, by the personal assistant, whether the user is in possession of the item (Hasan, C2, L55-67: packing recommendations based on travelers purchase history; C11, L55-67: object recognition used to determine objects that are already packed in container; C6, L1-30: item recommended for packing that the customer already owns, but has not packed yet and determine whether item is packed after making recommendation; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant);
upon determining that the user is not in possession of the item, generating, by the personal assistant, an instruction for obtaining the item by: determining, based on a second set of …signals transmitted to the UE…, (i) a personal preference of the user …(Hasan, C13, L1-60: determine which items the customer does not already own and needs to be purchased and instruct display of purchase based recommendation based on preferences and characteristics of customer from profile if customer does not already own the item needed for trip; C10, L40-61: profile information includes expensive or economy; C4, L35-45: any combination of wireless network; C21, L20-30: any type of telecommunication network),
identifying a link to an external site for obtaining the item, wherein the external site is included in the personal preference and offers the item…, and including the link in the instruction; and cause display, by the personal assistant of the instruction on the UE(Hasan, C15, L1-15: purchase link to cause placing an order for the customer; C18, L35-40: determine that a customer does not own one or more recommended items for a trip and may display a recommendation to purchase the item to the customer via a device; C13, L1-60: display of purchase based recommendation based on preferences and characteristics of customer from profile; C10, L40-61: profile information includes expensive or economy; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant);
Hasan does not teach:
…telecommunication signals…via a first base station of a wireless telecommunication network;…telecommunication signals…
…with increasing frequency…
…via a second base station of the wireless telecommunication network;
…telecommunication signals …via a third base station of the wireless telecommunication network…;
and (ii) a budget associated with the user;… in accordance with the budget…;
However, Kher teaches:
…telecommunication signals…via a first base station of a wireless telecommunication network;… …telecommunication signals… (Kher, [0032]: receive signals from cell site in telecommunications; [0024]: user equipment (UE) operating within a geographic area of its respective cell site using one or more antennas/towers capable of transmitting and receiving messages);
with increasing frequency (Kher, [0033]: low to high frequencies);
…via a second base station of the wireless telecommunication network ; …telecommunication signals …via a third base station of the wireless telecommunication network…(Kher, [0032]: receive signals from cell site in telecommunications; [0033]: any number of cell cites; [0024]: user equipment (UE) operating within a geographic area of its respective cell site using one or more antennas/towers capable of transmitting and receiving messages).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the signals of Hasan with telecommunications signals base station of wireless telecommunication network as taught by Kher because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan would continue to teach the signals except that telecommunications signals base station of wireless telecommunication network is taught according to the teachings of Kher in order to automatically collect and process data. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Kher, [0009-0010]).
However, Akutagawa teaches:
and (ii) a budget associated with the user;… in accordance with the budget…(Akutagawa, [0127]: recommendations based on user’s budget; [0051]: factor in food budget to help user budget purchasing meals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the user of Hasan and Kher with a budget associated with the user as taught by Akutagawa because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan would continue to teach the user except that now a budget associated with the user is taught according to the teachings of Akutagawa in order to recommend items based on a budget. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Akutagawa, [0051]).
Regarding claim 9
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa teaches the method of claim 8, wherein determining, by the personal assistant, whether the user is in possession of the item among the multiplicity of items comprises: obtaining a second multiplicity of items from the purchasing history associated with the user; determining whether the item is among the second multiplicity of items; upon determining that the item is among the second multiplicity of items, determining that the user is in possession of the item; and upon determining that the item is not among the second multiplicity of items, determine that the user is not in possession of the item (Hasan, C2, L55-67: packing recommendations based on travelers purchase history; C11, L55-67: object recognition used to determine objects that are already packed in container; C6, L1-30: item recommended for packing that the customer already owns, but has not packed yet and determine whether item is packed after making recommendation; C13, L1-87: determine items that the customer already and which items the customer does not already own based on purchase history; C15, L1-15: customer interacts with purchase recommendation by clicking a purchase link to cause placing an order for the customer; C18, L35-40: determine that a customer does not own one or more recommended items for a trip; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant).
Regarding claim 10
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa teaches the method of claim 8, comprising:
upon determining that the change in weather forecast, the change in the environment, or the change in the activity occurred, determining a second item that can address the change in weather forecast, the change in the environment, or the change in the activity (Hasan, C8, L35-60: upon indicating a change in weather (e.g. sunny to rainy), update item packing recommendation to recommend an additional item (e.g. umbrella); C12, L35-67: item recommendations are based on weather of travel destination such as recommending a raincoat or sweater for cold rainy weather);
determining whether the second item is among the multiplicity of items; upon determining that the second item is not among the multiplicity of items, determining whether the second item can be obtained prior to the start date; upon determining that the second item can be obtained prior to the start date, providing instructions to obtain the second item; and upon determining that the second item cannot be obtained prior to the start date, suggesting…(Hasan, C13, L1-67: determine whether or not customer has the recommended item to pack, and if the recommended item has not been purchased by the customer, generate recommendation to purchase the item and determine whether the recommended item will be delivered on time prior to the trip, and if the item cannot be delivered in time, suggest other options).
Hasan and Kher do not teach:
…canceling the activity.
However, Akutagawa teaches:
…canceling the activity (Akutagawa, [0045]: recommend changing an event initially recommended event; [0108]: a suggestion if cancel; [0201]: recommendations and cancelling or deleting reservations and any other steps).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the suggestion of Hasan and Kher with cancelling an activity as taught by Akutagawa because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan and Kher would continue to teach the suggestion except that now cancelling the activity is taught according to the teachings of Akutagawa in order to cancel and change activities. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Akutagawa, [0045]).
Regarding claim 11
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa teaches the method of claim 8, comprising: obtain, by the personal assistant associated with the mobile device operating on the 5G wireless telecommunication network, an indication ….needed to engage in the upcoming trip; determine whether the user is in possession…; and upon determining that the user is not in possession…, provide instructions to the user to obtain...(C16, L15-67: device provides user indication of already packed items and indications of items to be packed that have not already been packed yet; ; C13, L1-87: determine items that the customer already and which items the customer does not already own;C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant; C4, L35-45: any combination of wireless network; C21, L20-30: any type of telecommunication network; C18, L35-40: determine that a customer does not own one or more recommended items for a trip and may display a recommendation to purchase the item).
Hasan and Kher do not teach:
…of a document…;…of the document by searching files associated with the user;…of the document…;…the document.
However, Akutagawa teaches:
…of a document…;…of the document by searching files associated with the user;…of the document…;…the document (Akutagawa, [0031]: monitor communication (e.g. documents) to acquire information from documents associated with user; [0124]: review the communication; [0058]: searching for information in the communication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the item of Hasan and Kher with a document and searching files as taught by Akutagawa because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan and Kher would continue to teach the item except that now a document and searching files is taught according to the teachings of Akutagawa in order to analyze documents and search. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Akutagawa, [0031] and [0058]).
Regarding claim 13
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa teaches the method of claim 8, comprising instructions to:
Hasan and Kher do not teach:
obtain messages received by the mobile device operating on the 5G wireless telecommunication network; based on the messages, determine activity preferences associated with the user; prior to the start indicator associated with the upcoming trip, obtain a second activity associated with the destination, wherein the second activity is different from the activity, and wherein the second activity is not part of the upcoming trip; determine whether the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user; and upon determining that the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user, suggest the second activity to the user.
However, Akutagawa teaches:
obtain messages received by the mobile device operating on the 5G wireless telecommunication network; based on the messages, determine activity preferences associated with the user; prior to the start indicator associated with the upcoming trip, obtain a second activity associated with the destination, wherein the second activity is different from the activity, and wherein the second activity is not part of the upcoming trip; determine whether the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user; and upon determining that the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user, suggest the second activity to the user (Akutagawa, [0201]: retrieving and monitoring message data in real-time prior to the event to determine whether an event or reservation should be cancelled or changed; [0202]: generate incomplete event plan based on common interest of users and messages from users; [0191]: any wireless network and computing device; [0045]: a hike was recommended to several contacts, but a sudden storm appeared, so a recommendation for an indoor climbing wall is recommended; [0049]: determining user interest based on analyzing posts in order to recommend activities; [0145]: an alternative meeting time is suggested for the following day at a different location).
The motivation to combine Hasan and Kher with Akutagawa is the same as set forth above in claim 8.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Ghosh (US 20200402648 A1, “hereinafter Ghosh”).
Regarding claim 12
Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa teaches the method of claim 8, comprising instructions to: …associated with the activity,…associated with the activity (Hasan, C2, L55-67: determine a trip is planned and make packing recommendation; C3, L1-10: obtain travel information and destination information; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates, duration, destination, travel plans, and luggage being checked in).
Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa do not teach:
obtaining a medicine prescription associated with the user, and a date of last refill associated with the medicine prescription; based on the start indicator…, the end indicator …, and the date of the last refill associated with the medicine prescription, determining whether subsequent refill is needed during the activity …; and upon determining that subsequent refill is needed during the activity…, notify the user.
However, Ghosh teaches:
obtaining a medicine prescription associated with the user, and a date of last refill associated with the medicine prescription; based on the start indicator…, the end indicator …, and the date of the last refill associated with the medicine prescription, determining whether subsequent refill is needed during the activity …; and upon determining that subsequent refill is needed during the activity…, notify the user (Ghosh, [0092]: the historical pharmacy transaction data is retrieved; [0072] historical prescription refill dates 820 record the dates on which prescription refills were picked up by users (customers). The prescriptions can be picked up on the refill due date 264, before the refill due date and/or after the refill due date. A refill date range 266 for a given forecast future prescriptions; [0136]: notice is provided to the users; [0108] a predicted user arrival date associated with a selected predicted refill prescription, wherein the predicted user arrival date is calculated based on at least one historical arrival date for at least one refill of a selected prescription by a user; [0109] adjusts predicted prescription refill dates based on holidays, upcoming events or customer arrival patterns; [0038]:output schedule to users; [0039]: schedule transmitted to user device for review; [0075]: schedule associated with forecasted future prescriptions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the upcoming trip of Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa with determining if a prescription refill is needed for an upcoming event as taught by Ghosh because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa would continue to teach the upcoming trip except that now determining if a prescription refill is needed for an upcoming event is taught according to the teachings of Ghosh in order to forecast future prescriptions. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Ghosh, [0002]).
Claims 14-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasan and Kher in further view of Faga (US Pub. No. 20230334589 A1, hereinafter “Faga”).
Regarding claim 14
Hasan discloses a system comprising: at least one hardware processor; and at least one non-transitory memory storing instructions, which, when executed by the at least one hardware processor, cause the system to (Hasan, C20, L15-67: processor and instructions stored in memory):
obtain, by a personal assistant associated a user equipment (UE) operating on a wireless telecommunication network a first set of …signals transmitted to the UE… (Hasan, C2, L55-67: determine a trip is planned and make packing recommendation; C3, L1-10: obtain travel information and destination information; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates, duration, destination, travel plans, and luggage being checked in; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant; C4, L35-45: any combination of wireless network; C21, L20-30: any type of telecommunication network);
based on the first set of …signals, determining, by the personal assistant, an indication of an upcoming trip, a start indicator associated with a start date for the upcoming trip, an end indicator associated with an end date for the upcoming trip, a destination associated with the upcoming trip, and an activity associated with the destination (Hasan, C2, L55-67: determine a trip is planned and make packing recommendation; C3, L1-10: obtain travel information and destination information; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates, duration, destination, travel plans, mode of transportation, and luggage being checked in; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant; C4, L35-45: any combination of wireless network; C21, L20-30: any type of telecommunication network);
prior to the start date, periodically determining, by the personal assistant, whether at least one of (i) a change in weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) a change in an environment associated with the destination, or (iii) a change in the activity has occurred, wherein the periodic determining occurs …as a current date approaches the start date, and wherein the periodic determining is performed…, and in response to determining that least one of (i) the change in weather forecast associated with the destination, (ii) the change in an environment associated with the destination, or (iii) the change in the activity has occurred, determine, by the personal assistant, an item addressing the change (Hasan, C3, L1-10: obtain weather information and travel information for the destination and suggest items to purchase that are appropriate for the weather at the destination; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant; C2, L40-67: traveler prepares for travel by opening suitcase to pack items needed during the planned travel; C19, L1-45: recommend items that can be delivered prior to start of travel; C8, L35-60: receive updated notification when there is a change in weather which is used to update item recommendation based on the change in weather);
based on a multiplicity of items from a purchasing history associated with a user of the UE, determining, by the personal assistant, whether the user is in possession of the item (Hasan, C2, L55-67: packing recommendations based on travelers purchase history; C11, L55-67: object recognition used to determine objects that are already packed in container; C6, L1-30: item recommended for packing that the customer already owns, but has not packed yet and determine whether item is packed after making recommendation; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant);
upon determining that the user is in possession of the item generate, by the personal assistant, an instruction for replacing the item by: capturing, using a scanner of the UE, an image …, and in response to the determining, (i) generating, by the personal assistant, the instruction for replacing the item and (ii) providing, by the personal assistant, the instruction to the UE, wherein the UE displays the instruction to the user (Hasan, C8, L55-61: update recommendation to swap out an object that has already been recommended; C13, L1-15: determine items to pack from items the customer already has; C4, L45-67: capture an image and request packing recommendation based on captured image; C21, L59-67: scanner; C5, L1-20: display packing recommendations to device).
Hasan does not teach:
…telecommunication signals…via a first base station of a wireless telecommunication network;…telecommunication signals…;
…with increasing frequency …;
…via a second base station of the wireless telecommunication network;
an image representing a condition of the item, determining whether the item is in a damaged condition by comparing the image to a predetermined standard for replacing the item.
However, Kher teaches:
…telecommunication signals…via a first base station of a wireless telecommunication network;… …telecommunication signals… (Kher, [0032]: receive signals from cell site in telecommunications; [0024]: user equipment (UE) operating within a geographic area of its respective cell site using one or more antennas/towers capable of transmitting and receiving messages);
with increasing frequency (Kher, [0033]: low to high frequencies);
…via a second base station of the wireless telecommunication network (Kher, [0032]: receive signals from cell site in telecommunications; [0033]: any number of cell sites; [0024]: user equipment (UE) operating within a geographic area of its respective cell site using one or more antennas/towers capable of transmitting and receiving messages).
The motivation to combine Hasan and Kher is the same as set forth above in claim 8.
However, Faga teaches:
an image representing a condition of the item, determining whether the item is in a damaged condition by comparing the image to a predetermined standard for replacing the item (Faga, [0038]: analyze image data depicting damage to an item and determine the general location of damage associated with the item by analyzing images of the items and comparing these images with reference images of a similar items with no damage or with similar damage; [0049]: analyze photos to determine item needs to be replaced; [0050]: depending on the damage, item may need to be replaced).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the captured images of Hasan and Kher with an image representing a condition of the item, determining whether the item is in a damaged condition by comparing the image to a predetermined standard for replacing the item as taught by Faga because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan and Kher would continue to teach the captured images except that now an image representing a condition of the item, determining whether the item is in a damaged condition by comparing the image to a predetermined standard for replacing the item is taught according to the teachings of Faga in order to determine whether a damaged item needs to be replaced. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Faga, [0049]).
Regarding claim 15
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Faga teaches the system of claim 14, wherein the instructions to determine, by the personal assistant, whether the user is in possession of the item among the multiplicity of items comprise instructions to: obtain a second multiplicity of items from the purchasing history associated with the user; determine whether the item is among the second multiplicity of items; upon determining that the item is among the second multiplicity of items, determine that the user is in possession of the item; and upon determining that the item is not among the second multiplicity of items, determine that the user is not in possession of the item (Hasan, C2, L55-67: packing recommendations based on travelers purchase history; C11, L55-67: object recognition used to determine objects that are already packed in container; C6, L1-30: item recommended for packing that the customer already owns, but has not packed yet and determine whether item is packed after making recommendation; C13, L1-87: determine items that the customer already and which items the customer does not already own based on purchase history; C15, L1-15: customer interacts with purchase recommendation by clicking a purchase link to cause placing an order for the customer; C18, L35-40: determine that a customer does not own one or more recommended items for a trip; C22, L1-15: personal digital assistant).
Regarding claim 16
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Faga teaches the system of claim 14, comprising instructions to:
upon determining that the change in weather forecast, the change in the environment, or the change in the activity occurred, determining a second item that can address the change in weather forecast, the change in the environment, or the change in the activity (Hasan, C8, L35-60: upon indicating a change in weather (e.g. sunny to rainy), update item packing recommendation to recommend an additional item (e.g. umbrella); C12, L35-67: item recommendations are based on weather of travel destination such as recommending a raincoat or sweater for cold rainy weather);
determining whether the second item is among the multiplicity of items; upon determining that the second item is not among the multiplicity of items, determining whether the second item can be obtained prior to the start date; upon determining that the second item can be obtained prior to the start date, providing instructions to obtain the second item; and upon determining that the second item cannot be obtained prior to the start date, suggesting…(Hasan, C13, L1-67: determine whether or not customer has the recommended item to pack, and if the recommended item has not been purchased by the customer, generate recommendation to purchase the item and determine whether the recommended item will be delivered on time prior to the trip, and if the item cannot be delivered in time, suggest other options).
Hasan and Kher do not teach:
…canceling the activity.
However, Akutagawa teaches:
…canceling the activity (Akutagawa, [0045]: recommend changing an event initially recommended event; [0108]: a suggestion if cancel; [0201]: recommendations and cancelling or deleting reservations and any other steps).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the suggestion of Hasan, Kher, and Faga with cancelling an activity as taught by Akutagawa because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan, Kher, and Faga would continue to teach the suggestion except that now cancelling the activity is taught according to the teachings of Akutagawa in order to cancel and change activities. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Akutagawa, [0045]).
Regarding claim 17
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Faga teaches the system of claim 14, comprising instructions to: obtain, by the personal assistant associated with the UE operating on the wireless telecommunication network, an indication … needed to engage in the activity; determine whether the user is in possession …; and upon determining that the user is not in possession …, provide instructions to the user to obtain ...
Hasan, Kher, and Faga do not teach:
…of a document…;…of the document by searching files associated with the user;…of the document…;…the document.
However, Akutagawa teaches:
…of a document…;…of the document by searching files associated with the user;…of the document…;…the document (Akutagawa, [0031]: monitor communication (e.g. documents) to acquire information from documents associated with user; [0124]: review the communication; [0058]: searching for information in the communication).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the item of Hasan and Kher with a document and searching files as taught by Akutagawa because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan and Kher would continue to teach the item except that now a document and searching files is taught according to the teachings of Akutagawa in order to analyze documents and search. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Akutagawa, [0031] and [0058]).
Regarding claim 19
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Faga teaches the system of claim 14, comprising instructions to:
Hasan, Kher, and Faga do not teach:
obtain messages received by the UE operating on the wireless telecommunication network; based on the messages, determine activity preferences associated with the user; prior to the start indicator associated with the activity, obtain a second activity associated with the destination, wherein the second activity is different from the activity, and wherein the second activity is not part of the activity; determine whether the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user; and upon determining that the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user, suggest the second activity to the user.
However, Akutagawa teaches:
obtain messages received by the mobile device operating on the 5G wireless telecommunication network; based on the messages, determine activity preferences associated with the user; prior to the start indicator associated with the upcoming trip, obtain a second activity associated with the destination, wherein the second activity is different from the activity, and wherein the second activity is not part of the upcoming trip; determine whether the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user; and upon determining that the second activity falls within the activity preferences associated with the user, suggest the second activity to the user (Akutagawa, [0201]: retrieving and monitoring message data in real-time prior to the event to determine whether an event or reservation should be cancelled or changed; [0202]: generate incomplete event plan based on common interest of users and messages from users; [0191]: any wireless network and computing device; [0045]: a hike was recommended to several contacts, but a sudden storm appeared, so a recommendation for an indoor climbing wall is recommended; [0049]: determining user interest based on analyzing posts in order to recommend activities; [0145]: an alternative meeting time is suggested for the following day at a different location).
The motivation to combine Hasan, Kher, and Faga with Akutagawa is the same as set forth above in claim 8.
Regarding claim 20
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Faga teaches the system of claim 14, comprising instructions to: upon determining that the user is not in possession of the item, search the Internet for the item for purchase…; and provide the instruction to obtain the item (Hasan, C2, L55-67: packing recommendations based on travelers purchase history; C11, L55-67: object recognition used to determine objects that are already packed in container; C6, L1-30: item recommended for packing that the customer already owns, but has not packed yet and determine whether item is packed after making recommendation; C13, L1-87: determine items that the customer already and which items the customer does not already own based on purchase history; C15, L1-15: customer interacts with purchase recommendation by clicking a purchase link to cause placing an order for the customer; C18, L35-40: determine that a customer does not own one or more recommended items for a trip and may display a recommendation to purchase the item to the customer via a device; C19, L1-15: search website for recommended items user can purchase online).
Hasan, Kher, and Faga does not teach:
determine a budget associated with the item;… within the budget associated with the item.
However, Akutagawa teaches:
determine a budget associated with the item; …within the budget associated with the item (Akutagawa, [0127]: recommendations based on user’s budget; [0051]: factor in food budget to help user budget purchasing meals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the user of Hasan, Kher, and Faga with a budget associated with the user as taught by Akutagawa because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan, Kher, and Faga would continue to teach the user except that now a budget associated with the user is taught according to the teachings of Akutagawa in order to recommend items based on a budget. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Akutagawa, [0051]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasan, Kher, and Akutagawa as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Ghosh.
Regarding claim 18
The combination of Hasan, Kher, and Faga teaches system of claim 14, comprising instructions to: …associated with the activity,…associated with the activity (Hasan, C2, L55-67: determine a trip is planned and make packing recommendation; C3, L1-10: obtain travel information and destination information; C9, L45-55: travel information includes travel dates, duration, destination, travel plans, and luggage being checked in).
Hasan, Kher, and Faga do not teach:
obtaining a medicine prescription associated with the user, and a date of last refill associated with the medicine prescription; based on the start indicator…, the end indicator …, and the date of the last refill associated with the medicine prescription, determining whether subsequent refill is needed during the activity …; and upon determining that subsequent refill is needed during the activity…, notify the user.
However, Ghosh teaches:
obtaining a medicine prescription associated with the user, and a date of last refill associated with the medicine prescription; based on the start indicator…, the end indicator …, and the date of the last refill associated with the medicine prescription, determining whether subsequent refill is needed during the activity …; and upon determining that subsequent refill is needed during the activity…, notify the user (Ghosh, [0092]: the historical pharmacy transaction data is retrieved; [0072] historical prescription refill dates 820 record the dates on which prescription refills were picked up by users (customers). The prescriptions can be picked up on the refill due date 264, before the refill due date and/or after the refill due date. A refill date range 266 for a given forecast future prescriptions; [0136]: notice is provided to the users; [0108] a predicted user arrival date associated with a selected predicted refill prescription, wherein the predicted user arrival date is calculated based on at least one historical arrival date for at least one refill of a selected prescription by a user; [0109] adjusts predicted prescription refill dates based on holidays, upcoming events or customer arrival patterns; [0038]:output schedule to users; [0039]: schedule transmitted to user device for review; [0075]: schedule associated with forecasted future prescriptions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the upcoming trip of Hasan, Kher, and Faga with determining if a prescription refill is needed for an upcoming event as taught by Ghosh because the results of such a modification would be predictable. Specifically, Hasan, Kher, and Faga would continue to teach the upcoming trip except that now determining if a prescription refill is needed for an upcoming event is taught according to the teachings of Ghosh in order to forecast future prescriptions. This is a predictable result of the combination. (Ghosh, [0002]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is cited as Chung et al. (US Pub. No. 20240017728 A1) related to updating weather information based on an activity state of a user, Bender et al. (US Pub. No. 20180012175 A1) related to suggesting an item to pack in an item of luggage for a trip, and non-patent literature, A System and Method for Seamlessly and Effortlessly Obtaining the Appropriate Wardrobe When Traveling, related to using artificial intelligence, and machine learning on large amounts of relevant personal data to forecast the clothing the traveler will need at a specified destination.
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 LATASHA DEVI RAMPHAL whose telephone number is (571)272-2644. The examiner can normally be reached 11 AM - 7:30 PM (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, Jeffrey A. Smith can be reached at 5712726763. 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.
/LATASHA D RAMPHAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3688
/Jeffrey A. Smith/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3688
Prosecution Insights