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 .
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, and 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are directed a driving skill evaluation method, wherein first and second advice is given advice to the driver. However, the claims fall under the group of mental processes that are concepts performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion. In claim 1, the first and second advice are given based on an evaluation result of a driving skill, this evaluation could easily have been performed by the mental processes of a human. AS well, the evaluation process including deciding which of the first or second detailed advice to be given would have been readily performed by human mental processes. Even with regards to claim 9, even though the claims attempt to provide structure that performs the evaluation, the evaluation circuit could have readily constituted a human brain, since the brain is widely considered a highly complex, biological circuit or interconnected circuits. The claims doe not provide any structure that defines what circuit would have entailed. Evaluation and advice would still readily have been performed by human mental processes.
REMARKS:
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, and 4-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The claimed subject matter has overcome the prior art of record, however, the claims have 101 issues as discussed in the rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARYL C POPE whose telephone number is (571)272-2959. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM M-F.
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, BRIAN ZIMMERMAN can be reached at 571-272-3059. 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.
/DARYL C POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686
Prosecution Insights