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 .
Status of Claims
Office Action is in response to the Applicant's amendments and remarks filed5/19/2026. Claims 1 and 19 were amended. Claims 1-26 are presently pending and presented for examination.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
In regards to rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicant’s arguments, filed 5/19/2026, with respect to claims 1-26 have been fully considered and are not persuasive, (see remarks, pg. 16-22).
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the current claims are not statutory because they are directed towards an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite method for logistics management system, which is a method of managing interactions between people, as individuals utilizing a database can track and record vessel information to communicate as needed with the necessary parties. The computing elements such as “terminal, server, mapping part, automated identification system (AIS), calculating part of claim 1; terminal, server, automated identification system (AIS) of claim 19” are recited at a high level of generality and are generically recited computer elements. The generically recited computer elements amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The combination of these additional elements are additional elements do no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Also, with respect to technological improvement "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015). Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, elements being analyzed for significantly more are mere generic computer components being implemented to implement the abstract idea on a computer.
Response to Prior Art Arguments
In regards to rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant’s arguments, filed 5/19/2026, with respect to claims 1-26 have been fully considered and the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection has been withdrawn.
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 1-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites method for logistics management system.
Step 2A – Prong 1
Independent Claims 1 and 19 as a whole recite a method of organizing human activity. The limitations from exemplary Claim 1 reciting “a transportation tracking configured to communicate and to process transportation information about transportation, wherein the transportation tracking includes a vessel tracking configured to: process transportation information about vessels by using pieces of vessel identification information received from, wherein each of the pieces of vessel identification information includes a vessel name, an international maritime organization (IMO) number, a maritime mobile service identity (MMSI) number, and a Call sign; and provide the transportation information about the vessels, and wherein the vessel tracking includes: a vessel-map configured to receive pieces of navigation information as data of the vessels corresponding to the pieces of vessel identification information from a vessel information operator by providing the pieces of vessel identification information to the vessel information operator, and to map navigation routes of the vessels and real-time locations of the vessels onto a map and to map a delay state of the vessels, an estimated delay time of the vessels, and risk information that affected the delay of the vessels onto the map, wherein real-time locations of the vessels are displayed in various colors, the vessels operating normally displayed in a first color, the vessels delayed by one day displayed in a second color different from the first color, and the vessels delayed by two days or more displayed in a third color different from the first color and second color, wherein the vessel information operator includes an automated identification system; and a vessel-cargo configured to map vessel cargo information to a corresponding vessel among the vessels; a vessel delay configured to calculate the delay time of a vessel by using a period in time during which the vessel was anchored in a port because the vessel failed to sail, a period in time during which the vessel was anchored in the port from which the vessel took refuge, a distance of a navigation route along which the vessel bypassed, and the speed of the vessel; and responsive to calculating the delay time of the vessel, initiating a preliminary operation at a factory in accordance with the delay time” is a method of managing interactions between people, which falls into the certain methods of organizing human activity grouping. The mere recitation of a generic computer (terminal, server, mapping part, automated identification system (AIS), calculating part of claim 1; terminal, server, automated identification system (AIS) of claim 19) does not take the claim out of the methods of organizing human activity grouping. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Claims 1-26 and their underlining limitations, steps, features and terms, are further inspected by the Examiner under the current examining guidelines, and found, both individually and as a whole, not to include additional elements that are sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The limitations are directed to limitations referenced in MPEP 2106.05 that are not enough to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Limitations that are not enough include, as a non-limiting or non-exclusive examples, such as: (i) adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions, (ii) insignificant extra solution activity, and/or (iii) generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim recites the additional elements of (terminal, server, mapping part, automated identification system (AIS), calculating part of claim 1; terminal, server, automated identification system (AIS) of claim 19). The terminal, server, mapping part, automated identification system (AIS), calculating part of claim 1; terminal, server, automated identification system (AIS) of claim 19, are recited at a high level of generality and are generically recited computer elements. The generically recited computer elements amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The combination of these additional elements are additional elements do no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claim do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as discussed above, the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Thus, even when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e. an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. The claims are ineligible.
Dependent claims 2-18 and 20-26 are also directed to same grouping of methods of organizing human activity. The additional elements of the terminal in claims 2-4, 6, 8, 17, 20-21; server in claims 3-13, 16-18, 20-21, mapping part of claim 2, 6, 8, 10-11; device in claims 11 and 21; calculating part in claims 7, 9, 12-16; automation part in claim 17; accident photo in claim 17; logistics executor in claim 17; database in claims 15, 18 and 25; processing part in claims 17-18; , are additional elements do no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Novel/Non-Obvious Subject Matter
Examiner has determined that all of Applicant’s claims have overcome having prior art rejections. The reason for this is that Examiner does not believe that, at the time of Applicant’s priority date, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine prior art disclosures to result in the particular combination of elements/limitations in that claim, including the particular configuration of the elements/limitations with respect to each other in the particular combination, without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
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 IBRAHIM EL-BATHY whose telephone number is (571)272-7545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 7pm.
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, Shannon Campbell can be reached at 5712725587. 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.
/IBRAHIM N EL-BATHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626
Prosecution Insights