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- 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claim 1 is directed to a method (i.e. process). Therefore, claim 1 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Claim 8 is directed to a system (i.e. machine). Therefore, claim 8 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Claim 15 is directed to a method (i.e. process). Therefore, claim 1 is within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejections.
Claim 1 recites: A method of recommending a package box by executing, by a processor, a program that recommends a package box to pack a plurality of products, the program being stored in a memory, the method comprising:
in response to an identification code representing each of a plurality of target products to be packed in a single package box being received from a user terminal, obtaining a target product size of each of the plurality of target products from target product size information stored in a database;
determining a packing order of the plurality of target products in order of decreasing volume of the plurality of target products;
determining a first target product location of a first target product of the plurality of target products in a three-dimensional virtual space such that, in a current packing order according to the determined packing order for each of the plurality of target products, so that a volume difference between a first packing hexahedron volume of a first packing hexahedron including a first packing shape immediately before the current packing order and a second packing hexahedron volume of a second packing hexahedron including a second packing shape including the first target product added in the current packing order becomes smallest;
determining a packing location for each of the plurality of target products in the three-dimensional virtual space, to generate a virtual final hexahedron including all of the plurality of target products; and
determining a final package box among a plurality of package boxes, wherein the final package box has a smallest volume among a subset of the plurality of package boxes having a width, a length, and a height equal to or greater than that of the virtual final hexahedron.
Claim 8 recites:A system comprising:
a non-transitory memory storing a program that recommends a final package box, among a plurality of package boxes, to pack a plurality of products;
a box recommending server, by executing the program, enabled to:
determine a packing order of a plurality of target products to be packed in one box in order of a volume size of the plurality of target products; determine a location of a first target product in a three-dimensional virtual space such that, in a current packing order according to the determined packing order for each of the plurality of target products so that a volume difference between a first packing hexahedron volume of a first packing hexahedron including a first packing shape immediately before the current packing order and a second packing hexahedron volume of a second packing hexahedron including a second packing shape becomes smallest, wherein the second packing shape includes the first target product added in the current packing order;
determine a packing location for each of the plurality of target products in the three-dimensional virtual space, and generating a virtual final hexahedron including all of the plurality of target products; and
determining, among the plurality of package boxes, the final package box, wherein the final package box has a smallest volume among a subset of the plurality of package boxes having a width, a length, and a height equal to or greater than that of the virtual final hexahedron; and
a host server configured to call the box recommending server upon receiving an identification code representing each of the plurality of target products from a user terminal.
Claim 15 recites:A method comprising:
obtaining a target product size of each of a set of target products;
determining a packing order of the set of target products in order of decreasing volume of the set of target products;
through simulation, placing a first target product, for a first iteration of the determined packing order, in a first target product location in a three-dimensional virtual space;
through simulation, for a current iteration of the determined packing order after the first iteration, determining a current target product location of a current target product of the set of target products in the three-dimensional virtual space such that a volume difference is smallest, wherein the volume difference is between
a previous packing hexahedron volume of a previous packing hexahedron including a previous packing shape for a previous iteration of the determined packing order, and
a current packing hexahedron volume of a current packing hexahedron including a current packing shape, wherein the current packing shape includes the current target product added to the previous packing shape;
through simulation, sequentially performing the determining of the current target product location for each iteration of the determined packing order after the first iteration until all of the set of target products have been virtually packed in the three-dimensional virtual space for the determined packing order, to generate a virtual final hexahedron including all of the set of target products;
determining a physical final package box among a plurality of available physical package boxes, wherein the physical final package box has a smallest volume among a subset of the plurality of available physical package boxes having a width, a length, and a height equal to or greater than that of the virtual final hexahedron; and
packing the a set of target products in the physical final package box
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mathematical concept combined mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers identifying, locating a product/object (mental process) and the manipulation of parameters such as volume to calculate optimal packing order of product/object. Specifically, the “determining a first target product location” steps encompass a user to make an observation, evaluation, and about the product volume, using a mathematical application. Accordingly, the claims recite at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding the additional limitations of “in the three-dimensional virtual space… simulation”,
the examiner submits that these limitations are an attempt to generally link additional elements to a technological environment. In particular, simulations… three-dimensional virtual space; are recited at a high level of generality and merely automates and visualize the estimation steps, therefore acting as a generic computer to perform the abstract idea. Additionally, the recited units are claimed generically and are operating in their ordinary capacity and do not 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. The additional limitations are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a computer. Furthermore, the examiner submits through simulation…… in the three-dimensional virtual space, are insignificant extra-solution activities that merely use a computer to perform the process. In particular, the simulation steps are recited at a high level of generality (i.e. as a general means of gathering data for use in the determination step), and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, 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 not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the 2019 PEG, representative independent claim 1 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of the apparatus, the autonomous yard tractor, and the external vehicle amounts to nothing more than applying the exception using a generic computer component. Generally applying an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. And as discussed above, the additional limitations of receiving the image and acquiring the coordinates, the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The additional limitations of acquiring information and displaying the effect are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities because the background recites that the sensors from which the data is acquired/received are all conventional sensors, and the display is a conventional screen/control unit. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network, and data output are well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner. Hence, the claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 1, 8 and 15 do not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claims 2-7 do not cure the 101 deficiencies of claim 1 applying same rationale of abstract idea analysis.
Claims 9-14 do not cure the 101 deficiencies of claim 8 applying same rationale of abstract idea analysis.
Claims 16-19 do not cure the 101 deficiencies of claim 15 applying same rationale of abstract idea analysis.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: no prior art teaches the bolded features.
Claim 1. A method of recommending a package box by executing, by a processor, a program that recommends a package box to pack a plurality of products, the program being stored in a memory, the method comprising: in response to an identification code representing each of a plurality of target products to be packed in a single package box being received from a user terminal, obtaining a target product size of each of the plurality of target products from target product size information stored in a database; determining a packing order of the plurality of target products in order of decreasing volume of the plurality of target products; determining a first target product location of a first target product of the plurality of target products in a three-dimensional virtual space such that, in a current packing order according to the determined packing order for each of the plurality of target products, so that a volume difference between a first packing hexahedron volume of a first packing hexahedron including a first packing shape immediately before the current packing order and a second packing hexahedron volume of a second packing hexahedron including a second packing shape including the first target product added in the current packing order becomes smallest; determining a packing location for each of the plurality of target products in the three-dimensional virtual space, to generate a virtual final hexahedron including all of the plurality of target products; and determining a final package box among a plurality of package boxes, wherein the final package box has a smallest volume among a subset of the plurality of package boxes having a width, a length, and a height equal to or greater than that of the virtual final hexahedron.Claims 2-7 depend on allowable claim 1 and are therefore allowable for the same reasons as claim 1.Claim 8. A system comprising: a non-transitory memory storing a program that recommends a final package box, among a plurality of package boxes, to pack a plurality of products; a box recommending server, by executing the program, enabled to: determine a packing order of a plurality of target products to be packed in one box in order of a volume size of the plurality of target products; determine a location of a first target product in a three-dimensional virtual space such that, in a current packing order according to the determined packing order for each of the plurality of target products so that a volume difference between a first packing hexahedron volume of a first packing hexahedron including a first packing shape immediately before the current packing order and a second packing hexahedron volume of a second packing hexahedron including a second packing shape becomes smallest, wherein the second packing shape includes the first target product added in the current packing order; determine a packing location for each of the plurality of target products in the three-dimensional virtual space, and generating a virtual final hexahedron including all of the plurality of target products; and determining, among the plurality of package boxes, the final package box, wherein the final package box has a smallest volume among a subset of the plurality of package boxes having a width, a length, and a height equal to or greater than that of the virtual final hexahedron; and a host server configured to call the box recommending server upon receiving an identification code representing each of the plurality of target products from a user terminal.Claims 9-14 depend on allowable claim 8 and are therefore allowable for the same reasons as claim 8.
Claim 15. A method comprising: obtaining a target product size of each of a set of target products; determining a packing order of the set of target products in order of decreasing volume of the set of target products; through simulation, placing a first target product, for a first iteration of the determined packing order, in a first target product location in a three-dimensional virtual space; through simulation, for a current iteration of the determined packing order after the first iteration, determining a current target product location of a current target product of the set of target products in the three-dimensional virtual space such that a volume difference is smallest, wherein the volume difference is between a previous packing hexahedron volume of a previous packing hexahedron including a previous packing shape for a previous iteration of the determined packing order, and a current packing hexahedron volume of a current packing hexahedron including a current packing shape, wherein the current packing shape includes the current target product added to the previous packing shape; through simulation, sequentially performing the determining of the current target product location for each iteration of the determined packing order after the first iteration until all of the set of target products have been virtually packed in the three-dimensional virtual space for the determined packing order, to generate a virtual final hexahedron including all of the set of target products; determining a physical final package box among a plurality of available physical package boxes, wherein the physical final package box has a smallest volume among a subset of the plurality of available physical package boxes having a width, a length, and a height equal to or greater than that of the virtual final hexahedron; and packing the a set of target products in the physical final package box.Claims 16-18 depend on allowable claim 15 and are therefore allowable for the same reasons as claim 15.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is as follows:
US 20210134072 A1 A first set of dimensions can be derived corresponding to a real-world space and a second set of dimensions can be derived corresponding to a first physical item in the real-world. Further included is deriving a virtual representation of the real-world space from the first set of dimensions in a virtual environment and deriving a virtual representation of the first physical item from the second set of dimensions in the virtual environment. The virtual representation of the real-world space is represented as a hollow space, and the virtual representation of the first physical item is represented as a solid item that is user-manipulatable within the virtual environment and the virtual representation of the real-world space.
US 6563520 B1 A system for designing light and sound systems for use in stage productions. Virtual reality interfaces facilitate the selection and location of lighting and sound displays by providing a real-time simulation of the devices and the display produced thereby. The system also calculates parameters with respect to structural elements used for mounting the lighting and sound equipment. In addition, the virtual reality interface permits the simulation of the packing of the lighting and sound equipment and the automatic calculation of parameters relating to packing space, package weight, preferred location, and order of packing.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARTIN MUSHAMBO whose telephone number is (571)270-3390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:00AM-5:00PM).
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, Alicia Harrington can be reached at (571) 272-2330. 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.
/MARTIN MUSHAMBO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2615 01/24/2026