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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02 May 2024 and 05 May 2026 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Regarding claim 1, a computer-implemented method for foodstuff quality control on a sample containing a foodstuff with respect to potential ingredients of the sample, the method comprising: obtaining, based on a magnetic resonance measurement, a respective signal strength curve for at least one measurement volume comprising at least one portion of the sample, wherein the respective signal strength curve includes a respective signal strength for a plurality of measurement time points within a respective measurement interval, the respective signal strength resulting from an excitation of the respective measurement volume by an excitation signal radiated at least partially during the measurement interval; determining a respective ingredient signal curve for a plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample; determining relative ingredient contents of the plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample for the respective measurement volume, wherein the determining the relative ingredient contents includes: minimizing a difference between the signal strength curve for the respective measurement volume and a sum of the ingredient signal curves weighted according to the relative ingredient contents; and providing, based on the determined relative ingredient contents, an electronic signal to facilitate further processing of the sample.”
Claim 1, in view of the claim limitations, recites the abstract idea of “obtaining, based on a magnetic resonance measurement, a respective signal strength curve for at least one measurement volume comprising at least one portion of the sample, wherein the respective signal strength curve includes a respective signal strength for a plurality of measurement time points within a respective measurement interval, the respective signal strength resulting from an excitation of the respective measurement volume by an excitation signal radiated at least partially during the measurement interval; determining a respective ingredient signal curve for a plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample; determining relative ingredient contents of the plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample for the respective measurement volume, wherein the determining the relative ingredient contents includes: minimizing a difference between the signal strength curve for the respective measurement volume and a sum of the ingredient signal curves weighted according to the relative ingredient contents; and providing, based on the determined relative ingredient contents, an electronic signal to facilitate further processing of the sample.”
As a whole, in view of the claim limitations, but for the computer components and systems performing the claimed functions, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the recited “obtaining, based on a magnetic resonance measurement, a respective signal strength curve for at least one measurement volume comprising at least one portion of the sample, wherein the respective signal strength curve includes a respective signal strength for a plurality of measurement time points within a respective measurement interval, the respective signal strength resulting from an excitation of the respective measurement volume by an excitation signal radiated at least partially during the measurement interval; determining a respective ingredient signal curve for a plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample; determining relative ingredient contents of the plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample for the respective measurement volume, wherein the determining the relative ingredient contents includes: minimizing a difference between the signal strength curve for the respective measurement volume and a sum of the ingredient signal curves weighted according to the relative ingredient contents; and providing, based on the determined relative ingredient contents, an electronic signal to facilitate further processing of the sample.”; therefore, the claim recites mental processes and mathematical concepts. Accordingly, the claim recites a mental process and a mathematical concept, and thus, the claim recites an abstract idea under the first prong of Step 2A.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application under the second prong of Step 2A. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements beyond the recited abstract idea of“[a] computer- implemented method” and “the method is carried out by one or more physical processors configured by machine-readable instructions” as recited in claims 1 and 16, individually and when viewed as an ordered combination, and pursuant to the broadest reasonable interpretation, each of the additional elements are computing elements recited at high level of generality implementing the abstract idea on a computer (i.e. apply it), and thus, are no more than applying the abstract idea with generic computer components. There is no particular technological improvement to the MR scanner, signal acquisition, or computer itself.
Regarding claim 2, further comprising determining an absolute ingredient content for at least one of the potential ingredients based on the respective relative ingredient content and a sum of all ascertained relative ingredient contents. These are pure mathematical refinements of the relative content calculation already found abstract in Claim 1. They do not add a practical application or inventive concept.
Regarding claim 3, wherein determining the absolute ingredient content comprises dividing the respective relative ingredient content by the sum of all ascertained relative ingredient contents. These are pure mathematical refinements of the relative content calculation already found abstract in Claim 1. They do not add a practical application or inventive concept.
Regarding claim 4, wherein further treatment of the sample depends on fulfilment of a trigger condition, the fulfilment of the trigger condition being based on whether: the relative or absolute ingredient content for at least one specific potential ingredient exceeds a respective trigger limit value for the measurement volume or at least one of the measurement volumes; and/or the sum across the relative or absolute ingredient contents across a subgroup of the potential ingredients that does not contain all of the potential ingredients exceeds a respective trigger limit value for the measurement volume or at least one of the measurement volumes; and/or the minimized difference between the signal strength curve and the sum of the ingredient signal curves weighted according to the relative ingredient contents exceeds a respective trigger limit value for the measurement volume or at least one of the measurement volumes. This adds a decision /threshold step and a link to “further treatment.” The link to treatment is functional and generic. It does not add a practical application or inventive concept.
Regarding claim 5, wherein, in response to the trigger condition being fulfilled, the method comprising: repeating the obtaining the respective signal strength curve and the determining the relative ingredient contents for a plurality of partial volumes of the measurement volume; and determining, for a respective partial volume of the plurality of partial volumes, whether a further trigger condition is fulfilled, the fulfillment of which depends on whether: the relative or absolute ingredient content for the at least one specified ingredient exceeds the respective trigger limit value or a further respective trigger limit value; and/or the sum of the relative or absolute ingredient contents across the subgroup exceeds the respective trigger limit value or the further respective trigger limit value; and/or the minimized difference between the signal strength curve and the sum of the ingredient signal curves weighted according to the relative ingredient contents for the respective partial volume exceeds the respective trigger limit value or the further respective trigger limit value. This adds spatial subdivision and remeasurement. It still contains a mathematical comparison/threshold. There is no technological improvement to the MR system or a concrete physical control loop.
Regarding claim 6, wherein the measurement volume or at least one of the partial volumes is selected as a function of obtained spatially resolved magnetic resonance data. This adds a data-driven volume selection step. It still contains a mathematical selection logic being applied to conventional spatially resolved MR data.
Regarding claim 7, wherein the measurement volume is selected as a function of obtained spatially resolved magnetic resonance data. This adds a data-driven volume selection step. It still contains a mathematical selection logic being applied to conventional spatially resolved MR data.
Regarding claim 8, further comprising determining a relative ingredient content for: water; fat; muscle tissue; pale, soft, exudative (PSE) meat; and/or at least one component of spoiled meat. This merely limits an abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (food quality, specific meat defects).
Regarding claim 9, wherein determining the respective ingredient signal curves for at least one of the plurality of potential ingredients is based on: a simulation; or a calculation based on at least one ingredient parameter of the at least one of the plurality of potential ingredients. This is a classic mathematical modeling/simulation and it reinforces that the claim is directed to abstract mathematical concepts.
Regarding claim 10, wherein the at least one ingredient parameter considered is a T1 time and/or a T2 time of the respective at least one of the plurality of potential ingredients. This is classic mathematical modeling/simulation and reinforces that the claim is directed to abstract mathematical concepts.
Regarding claim 11, wherein the sample comprises a plurality of individual foodstuffs or types of foodstuff packaging carriable by a common carrier. This adds a sample-configuration limitation. It does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding claim 12, wherein obtaining a respective signal strength curve comprises: conveying the sample into an acquisition region of a magnetic resonance device by a conveyor; and radiating the excitation signal and acquiring the respective signal strength curve for the at least one measurement volume by the magnetic resonance device, wherein the conveyor is configured to automatically and consecutively guide a plurality of samples into the acquisition region to acquire relative ingredient contents for the respective plurality of samples. This adds physical hardware (conveyor and MR device) and an automated , sequential industrial-scale acquisition process. These elements are somewhat considered as conventional.
Regarding claim 13, wherein the electronic signal is configured to generate a notification corresponding to the determined relative ingredient contents. This adds a post-solution activity such as a notification which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding claim 14, wherein the electronic signal is a control signal configured to control a device to process the sample. This adds a post-solution activity such as a control signal which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding claim 15, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium with an executable program stored thereon, that when executed, instructs a processor to perform the method of claim 1. This adds a software program being stored in a CRM with a processor, which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding claim 16, a device adapted for foodstuff quality control on a sample containing a foodstuff with respect to potential ingredients of the sample, the device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to: obtain, based on a magnetic resonance measurement, a respective signal strength curve for at least one measurement volume comprising at least one portion of the sample, wherein the respective signal strength curve includes a respective signal strength for a plurality of measurement time points within a respective measurement interval, the respective signal strength resulting from an excitation of the respective measurement volume by an excitation signal radiated at least partially during the measurement interval; determine a respective ingredient signal curve for a plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample; determine relative ingredient contents of the plurality of the potential ingredients of the sample for the respective measurement volume, wherein the determining the relative ingredient contents includes: minimizing a difference between the signal strength curve for the respective measurement volume and a sum of the ingredient signal curves weighted according to the relative ingredient contents; and provide, based on the determined relative ingredient contents, an electronic signal to facilitate further processing of the sample. This provides classic or conventional computer elements which are considered as no improvement to the computer itself. Also, obtaining the data and determining relative contents is a classic abstract idea.
Regarding claim 17, further comprising a magnetic resonance device that is configured to: radiate the excitation signal into the at least one measurement volume, and acquire the respective signal strength curve when the sample is arranged at least partially in an acquisition region of the magnetic resonance device. This adds physical hardware such as a MR device and an automated , sequential industrial-scale acquisition process. These elements are somewhat considered as conventional.
Regarding claim 18, further comprising a conveyor configured to automatically and consecutively guide a plurality of samples into the acquisition region to acquire the relative ingredient contents for the respective plurality of samples. This adds physical hardware such as a conveyor and an automated , sequential industrial-scale acquisition process. These elements are somewhat considered as conventional.
The claims do not include additional elements (MR measurement of a foodstuff sample, generic computer, electronic signal) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception under Step 2B. As noted above, the aforementioned additional elements beyond the recited abstract idea, as an order combination, are no more than mere instructions to implement the idea using generic computer components (i.e. apply it), and further, generally link the abstract idea to a field of use, which is not sufficient to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea; therefore, the additional elements are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. Looking at these limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing additional that is sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea because they simply provide instructions to use a generic arrangement of generic computer components and recitations of generic computer structure that perform well-understood, routine, and conventional computer functions that are used to “apply” the recited abstract idea. Thus, the elements of the claims, considered both individually and as an ordered combination, are not sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Since there are no limitations in these claims that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that these claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Grodzki (US 11,555,876) discloses a quantitative magnetic resonance imaging method, wherein a time series of magnetic resonance images of an examination region that are assigned to different time points following an excitation is acquired by means of a magnetic resonance device, from which images a signal evolution varying with respect to time is determined for each pixel from the magnetic resonance data of all of the magnetic resonance images and, by comparison of the signal evolution with comparison evolutions stored in a database, at least one quantitative result value on which the comparison evolution exhibiting the greatest agreement is based is assigned to a respective pixel. Bajema et al (US 10,837,927) disclose a non-invasive NMR based apparatus for measuring a food attribute (moisture, sugar content) in food products comprises a magnetic chamber, an RF pulsing device attached to the magnetic chamber, a sensor receiver, and a data processing unit in communication with the sensor receiver. The pulsing device exposes the food ingredients/snacks to an RF field and produces an NMR response signal that is detected by the sensor receiver. The data processing unit quantitatively measures a food attribute of the food product based on the NMR response signal. Cohen et al (US 2019/0011383) disclose a portable or stationary system for determining the quality of processed food product that includes a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectrometer and a controller. The controller can be configured to: receive an NMR spectrum of the processed food product from the NMR spectrometer, identify a first peak related to a first component of the processed food product from the received NMR spectrum and determine the quality of the processed food product based on the identification.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AN H DO whose telephone number is (571)272-2143. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:00am-4:00pm.
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, Ricardo Magallanes can be reached on 571-272-5960. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AN H DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights