DETAILED ACTION
A. This action is in response to the following communications: Transmittal of New Application filed 04/04/2024.
B. Claims 1-20 remains 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.
Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to certain methods of organizing human activity without significantly more. The claim(s) 1, 9 and 17 recite(s) “receiving user input de-linking first block”, grouping of abstract ideas. The mere nominal recitation of a generic processor and user interface does not take the claim out of the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim as a whole merely describes how to generally “apply” the concept of storing, finding and updating related information in a computer environment. The claimed “non-transitory storage devices” and “system” are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools perform an existing records update process. Even considered in combination, simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer with storage devices recited at a high level of generality is not a practical application of the abstract idea.The limitation query the system (data selections) on a generic user interface executed by a generic computer, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “by a processor,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “by a processor” language, “in response to receiving” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually organizing data.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to the significantly more than the judicial exception because as noted previously, the system and the storage devices individually and in combination merely describe how to generally “apply” the concept of updating records in a computer environment. The same applies here. (MPEP 2106.05(d). Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claims adds significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
The claim is ineligible.
Claims 2-8,10-16 and 18-20 do not include elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea and are also rejected under the same rational.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hemenway, James et al. (US Pub. 2014/0222181 A1), herein referred to as “Hemenway”.
As for claims 1, 9 and 17, Hemenway teaches. A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium and corresponding system of claim 9 and method of claim 17 comprising instructions recorded thereon, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one data processor of a system, cause the system to (par. 49 hardware environment to execute software of the invention):
Hemenway teaches in paragraph 40, a graphical user interface-based editor facility for defining control programs (e.g., control strategies described herein below) for processes is described, and reference is made to figures illustratively depicting an exemplary embodiment of the invention. In accordance with the illustrative embodiment, the editor facility provides graphical user interface-driven functionality including, among other things: supporting a set of appearance objects, defining a variety of depictions for a single control object (e.g., a control block object, a control strategy object, and the like), connecting input and output attributes of the control objects through graphical user interface object manipulations (e.g., drag and drop actions), establishing execution order of control objects through graphical user interface selection, designating distinct visual appearances for different types of connections, automatically resizing attribute display elements in response to relocation of the element within a control block's appearance object display, and dynamically updating the appearance objects based on changes to parameter settings for a control block.
Hemenway in paragraph 57 give an overview structure of the software in FIG. 2 that depicts an exemplary set of interfaces/components associated with the control program editor facility. The interaction of software components (represented by circles) and data/objects (represented by rectangles) for the editor facility is depicted with reference to a strategy object 204 containing one or more control objects (e.g., control block and child strategy objects) and associated appearance objects 208. The illustrative components of the editor facility, residing on the workstation 102, provide/support the following: a graphical user interface-based control program (e.g., control strategy) editor, an editor of graphical depictions associated with control objects/templates from which control programs are created, and a live data display mechanism for displaying current values of control object I/O attributes corresponding to a control program defined and displayed via the control program editor.
PNG
media_image1.png
430
438
media_image1.png
Greyscale
receive, via a user interface presented on a client device, a relation modification request for de-linking a first block item of a first type from a second block item of a second type and linking the first block item to a third block item of the second type (par. 145 user makes a link between two nodes on the canvas user interface depicted in figure 9-10; par. 159 give further definition to how user makes relationship connections between blocks upon doing so the connection between two blocks can be replaced as mentioned in paragraph 160 and the system will automatically update the connection map shown in figure 10 to reflect user editing therefore a user can sever the connection between a first node and a second node and the system allow for reconnection to a third node as mentioned that a user can make relationship connections between any nodes and specifically attributes shared between nodes are visually connected as well; par. 166 give scenario of when a user deletes a control block representation; the editor further describes the action of deleting and adding new declarations to control objects mentioned in paragraphs 175-177);
query the system for configuration information relating to displayed block items presented in a first workspace associated with the user interface, wherein the displayed block items are associated with the first block item (par. 160 makes that automatic determination upon user editing the nodes/ objects on the canvas and updates the graphical user interface of the connections added, deleted and modified by the user);
obtain, in response to the query, a configuration for the first block item,
wherein the configuration includes a type-specific inheritance preference associated with the first block item, and wherein the type-specific inheritance preference comprises a protocol for determining properties of the first block item that are inherited from properties of the third block item and for determining properties of the first block item that are retained from properties of the second block item;
determine that the second block item and the third block item are of the second type (par. 175-177 the editor allows for the user to add and delete attributes of an object presented on the canvas of the user interface);
PNG
media_image2.png
430
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
in response to determining that the second block item and the third block item are of the second type, generate attribute data, for the first block item and each subordinate block item of the first block item, according to the type-specific inheritance preference; and cause the user interface to display the first block item linked with the third block item according to the attribute data (par. 177-179 user creates connections between blocks through drag interactions the user is able to create input/output declarations for block connections between blocks and nested strategies (blocks shared across different hierarchical structures saved as a template for quick recall to the editor canvas); the system will automatically update appearance of objects (the graphical connections between objects) to accurately depict connections between them and among other things, attributes of said objects).
As for claims 2, 10 and 18, Hemenway teaches. The non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the first block item is embedded as an in-page object of a first page corresponding to the second block item, and wherein the third block item corresponds to a second page (par. 127-128 the canvas can have multiple pages and each page can have multiple objects from the library wherein the objects can be nested and connected to show hierarchical relationships as discussed; therefore a first block can be on first page that has a connection to a second block and on a second page is a different block not shown on first page that we can term third block).
As for claims 3, 11 and 19, Hemenway teaches. The non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the instructions for determining that the second block item and the third block item are of the second type cause the system to:
determine, based on a block database associated with the first workspace, that a first attribute for the second block item and a second attribute for the third block item include an indication of the second type, wherein the indication of the second type includes an indication of one of a page, a task, an event, or a file (par. 70 example of different attributes that can be defined and associated with blocks/nodes; par. 159 give further definition to how user makes relationship connections between blocks upon doing so the connection between two blocks can be replaced as mentioned in paragraph 160 and the system will automatically update the connection map shown in figure 10 to reflect user editing therefore a user can sever the connection between a first node and a second node and the system allow for reconnection to a third node as mentioned that a user can make relationship connections between any nodes and specifically attributes shared between nodes are visually connected as well).
As for claims 4, 12 and 20, Hemenway teaches. The non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the instructions for causing the user interface to display the first block item linked with the third block item cause the system to: determine that the second type corresponds to a page type; and
based on determining that the second type corresponds to the page type, cause the user interface to display the first block item as an in-page object of a page corresponding to the third block item (par. 127-128 the canvas can have multiple pages and each page can have multiple objects from the library wherein the objects can be nested and connected to show hierarchical relationships as discussed; therefore a first block can be on first page that has a connection to a second block and on a second page is a different block not shown on first page that we can term third block).
As for claims 5 and 13, Hemenway teaches. The non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 4, wherein the instructions cause the system to cause the user interface not to display the first block item as an object of a page corresponding to the second block item (par. 94 and 97 give one example by means of Remove Block function removes an identified block object from the strategy object 204. An input for Remove Block function includes the contained name of the block object to be removed and a flag indicating whether execution order needs to be updated in other remaining blocks in the strategy object 204; par. 127 is another example in which a second page is displayed instead of a first page).
As for claims 6 and 14, Hemenway teaches. The non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the attribute data cause the system to: determine, based on the configuration, a first property of the first block item that is retained from the second block item; determine a first attribute of the second block item, wherein the first attribute is associated with the first property; and generate the attribute data for the first block item to include the first attribute (par. 144 user adds attributes which can be from relationship with another block/node; par. 145 connecting attributes between blocks/nodes; par. 160 the strategy editor performs a set of automated tasks to update affected data structures and graphical user interfaces. In particular, the strategy editor updates the data structure for the selected control object to reflect the new preferred appearance object. The graphical representation for the new appearance object replaces the previous graphical representation. Furthermore, the connections are adjusted in accordance with the new appearance object's configuration).
As for claims 7 and 15, Hemenway teaches. The non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 6, wherein the first attribute comprises one of a title, tag, timestamp, description, file, or item (par. 70 example of different attributes that can be defined and associated with blocks/nodes).
As for claims 8 and 16, Hemenway teaches. The non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the attribute data cause the system to: determine, based on the configuration, a first property of the first block item that is inherited from the third block item; determine a first attribute of the third block item, wherein the first attribute is associated with the first property; and generate the attribute data for the first block item to include the first attribute (par. 160 the strategy editor performs a set of automated tasks to update affected data structures and graphical user interfaces. In particular, the strategy editor updates the data structure for the selected control object to reflect the new preferred appearance object. The graphical representation for the new appearance object replaces the previous graphical representation. Furthermore, the connections are adjusted in accordance with the new appearance object's configuration; par. 171 (1) the user may add and remove attributes displayed on an appearance object; (2) the user may change the location of an attribute displayed on an appearance object; (3) the user may select a preferred appearance object (for those objects that have multiple appearance objects defined), e.g., Control Strategy Declarations/Connections; and (4) the user may modify the attributes for the appearance object).
(Note :) It is noted that any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
AUTOMATICALLY UPDATING GRAPHICAL SYMBOLS IN A CONTROL LOOP STRATEGY DIAGRAM
Document ID
US 20140222181 A1
Date Published
2014-08-07
Abstract
Editing an appearance object corresponding to a control object having a plurality of attributes and displayed on a graphical user interface. The graphical user interface displays a plurality of interconnected appearance objects in a strategy diagram, where each of the plurality of interconnected appearance objects corresponds to an aspect of a control process. An appearance object is selected for editing. A pre-defined symbol from a template is selected using a graphical editor. The symbol includes either elements representing attributes of the control process or a symbol definition. The symbol replaces the appearance object in the strategy diagram. The symbol definition is modified using a symbol definition editor. The elements are modified corresponding to a desired change of an attribute of the control process.
Graphical User Interface For Allowing A Template Editor To Create A Hierarchy Template On A Computer, Comprises Plant-group-type Menu That Displays Multiple Distinct Plant-group-type Icons
Document ID
US 20150346942 A1
Date Published
2015-12-03
Abstract
NOVELTY - The graphical user interface (400) comprises a hierarchy template creation icon (441) to create an editable hierarchy tile, when activated by a template editor. A plant-group-type menu (430) displays multiple distinct plant-group-type icons. A graphical editing interface allows the template editor to edit an editable hierarchy tile to create a new hierarchy template (450) by selecting a primary plant-group-type icon (451) from the plant-group-type menu.
Apparatus For Dynamically Hiding Financial Portfolio Data Regarding E.g. Bank Account, In Hierarchical Tree Structure, Has Processor For Expanding Selected Node To Hide On Graphical User Interface Of Descendant Nodes Of Selected Node
Document ID
US 20160253759 A1
Date Published
2016-09-01
Abstract
NOVELTY - The apparatus has a processor for monitoring selection of a node of a set of nodes. The processor automatically expands a selected node to identify on a graphical user interface of descendant nodes of the selected node to which a current user has access based on user access rights data (114). The data is hidden on the graphical user interface of the descendant nodes of the selected node based on the user access rights data such that visual representation of financial portfolio data (112) hides nodes to which the current user not have access.
Inquires
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to NICHOLAS AUGUSTINE at telephone number (571)270-1056.
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.
PNG
media_image3.png
213
559
media_image3.png
Greyscale
/NICHOLAS AUGUSTINE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2178 May 7, 2026
Prosecution Insights