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 .
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 1-19, 23-25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the method claim is directed is facially a process however, the claim is effectively directed to an abstract idea, of receiving information, assigning identifiers, defining events using heuristics, storing the events in a database and associating them with an animal identifier. Which is considered data collection, organization, identification, and recordkeeping that is associated with an abstract information management concept. The physical limitations of “meat physically transported on a conveyor, sensors physically positioned along the conveyor, sensors obtain characteristics of the meat, the meat not physically marked with the animal identifier and the system assigns native identifiers based on the sensor outputs”. However, what are the sensors actually measuring and what technical problem the claimed sensor/identifier architecture solves? The claim does not improve computer functionality or another technology/technical field rather that merely of using a computer as a tool for an abstract idea.
Regarding claim 23, the claim is directed to a physical system containing a conveyor, meat/meat portions, sensors positioned along the conveyor, an append-only database and processors/memory implementing the frontend and identifier manager, however, the potential inventive substance is essentially obtain information about meat, assign identifiers, infer events using heuristics, store those events, and associate identifiers with an animal identifier. The Examiner characterizes that as information processing/organization or recordkeeping implemented with generic computing components. The claim is directed to merely manipulating information in the abstract. The ”frontend component” and “identifier manager” doesn’t provide eligibility weight cause they are directed just to generic softward.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-19, 23-25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. The Examiner wants to know what a “native identifier” actually is, how sensor measurements produce it, whether it is unique, whether it identifies individual pieces of meat, portions, batches or something else, how the identifier survives the splitting of the meat or meat portion and how the system prevents two pieces from receiving the same identifier or how a split piece of meat maintains a different or same identifier. The term “heuristics” is extremely broad, and computer implemented functional limitations still have to satisfy 112(a). Additionally, the claim reads on potentially any sensors, any sensor outputs and any heuristics that can accomplish the stated result. The disclosure does not enable the claimed scope without undue experimentation. Regarding claim 23, the disclosure doesn’t enable the full breadth of all sensors/ all sensor outputs/ all heuristics encompassed by the claim. Lastly, the “frontend component” and “an identifier manager that stores the events” are unclear whether the frontend component and an identifier manager software labels rather than technical structures.
Claims 1-19, 23-25 and 27 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. The claimed phrase “wherein the meat or the first meat portion are not physically marked with an animal identifier” is understandable, although “physically marked” requires clarification. The claimed phrase “each sensor outputs characterizing the meat or the first meat portion” is grammatically and technically awkward, in that, a sensor doesn’t normally “output characterizing”. Also, the Examiner does not understand the meets and bounds of the term “native identifier” and is therefore indefinite. The phrase “events regarding the process” is unclear as to what constitutes an “event”. The phrase “heuristics about the or the first meat portion” is indefinite because the claim does not identify what the relation between the sensor output and the heuristic is required. Lastly, the claim says “assigning, by a frontend component implemented using a first processor and a first memory” and later claims “storing, by an identifier manager implemented using a second process and a second memory” is unclear, in that, what technically distinguishes the frontend component from the identifier manager?
Regarding claim 23, the phrase “each sensor outputs characterizing the meat is awkward and needs revision. The phrase “assigns native identifiers” is unclear as to what makes an identifier native or what distinguishes a native identifier from any other identifier. The phrase “events regarding the process” is vague and indefinite and the technical boundaries are not readily known. The phrase “based on heuristics about the meat” is indefinite as to the meets and bounds of this terminology.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD T. PRICE JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6892. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3:30PM.
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, Peter M. Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/RICHARD T PRICE JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights