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
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 7, “owner” should be followed by a semi-colon (;) and not a comma (,). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, “comprising” should be followed by a colon (:) and not a comma (,). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, “owner” should be followed by a semi-colon (;) and not a comma (,). The line “optionally authenticating and/or authorizing the request to access the emission data;” should be followed by “and”, or “or”, or “and/or”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, “owner” should be followed by a semi-colon (;) and not a comma (,). The line “optionally authenticating and/or authorizing the request to access the emission data;” should be followed by “and”, or “or”, or “and/or”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1:
The claims are directed to a process (method as introduced in Claims 11, 12, and 20), and/or apparatus (Claim 1), and/or non-transitory computer-readable storage medium with executable instructions (Claims 15 and 19, computer element as described in specification at page 6, par. 5), thus Claims 1-20 fall within one of the four statutory categories. See MPEP 2106.03.
Step 2A, Prong 1:
The claimed invention recites an abstract idea according to MPEP §2106.04. The independent claims which recite the following claim limitations as an abstract idea, are underlined below.
Claims 1, 11, 15, and 19 recite (as represented by the language of Claim 1):
receiving a request to provide a decentral identifier associated with emission data and a data owner[;]
in response to the request, generating the chemical product passport including the decentral identifier and data related to the emission data; and
providing the chemical product passport for access by a data consuming service under control by a data providing service associated with the data owner.
Claims 12 and 20 further recite (as represented by the language of Claim 20):
optionally authenticating and/or authorizing the request to access the emission data; [and]
based on optionally the authentication and/or authorization, providing access to emission data associated with the decentral identifier of the chemical product passport.
The underlined claim limitations as emphasized above, as drafted, recite a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion). Other than reciting a computer implementation, nothing in the claim elements precludes the step from encompassing the performance of concepts performed in the human mind which represents the abstract idea of mental processes. But for the recitation of generic implementation of computer system components, the claimed invention merely recites a process for requesting emissions data related to an owner using an identifier and responding to that request by generating and providing a chemical product passport (which is merely a set of data, see specification at page 81) which could be performed in the human mind or by using pen and paper. For example, a user could provide a request with an identifier (in a decentralized data storage and access organization), and in response, other users could collect and provide the data in a “product passport” or any other type of report. Additionally, users could optionally apply any type of authentication and/or authorization for accessing the data.
1 It is noted that reciting a “digital” representation does not inherently tie the process to a technological
environment.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite additional elements such as:
an apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes and one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions for performing the claim steps;
computer for performing the claim steps; and/or
a computer element with instructions, which when executed on one or more computing node(s) configured for performing the claim steps
In particular, the additional elements cited above beyond the abstract idea are recited at a high-level of generality and simply equivalent to a generic recitation and basic functionality that amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the judicial exception using generic computer technology components.
Accordingly, since the specification describes the additional elements in general terms, without describing the particulars, the additional elements may be broadly but reasonably construed as generic computing components being used to perform the judicial exception (see specification at page 21, describing apparatuses and computers in general terms and as general-purpose, page 3 additionally compares the apparatus to the general-purpose computers). These claimed additional elements merely recite the words “apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
Thus, the additional claim elements are not indicative of integration into a practical application, because the claims do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e)). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B:
The claims do not include additional elements, individually or in combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept at Step 2B. Thus, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent Claims:
Claims 2-10, 13, 14, and 16-18 recite further elements related to the analysis, scoring, and message improvement steps of the parent claims. These activities fail to differentiate the claims from the related activities in the parent claims and fail to provide any material to render the claimed invention to be significantly more than the identified abstract ideas, as outlined below.
Claim 2 recites “wherein the decentral identifier is provided by one central node or by one or more decentral nodes”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claims 3 and 16 recite “wherein the decentral identifier is provided to a node generating the chemical product passport and to at least one authentication data registry”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the generation of the chemical product passport includes providing the decentral identifier associated with a physical entity of a product” which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the chemical product passport includes one or more authentication mechanisms associated with the decentral identifier and the data related to emission data”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claim 6 recites “wherein the chemical product passport is related to one or more authorization mechanisms associated with the decentral identifier and the data related to emission data”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claim 7 recites “wherein the data related to emission data includes one or more digital representation(s) pointing to emission data or parts thereof”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract. The inclusion of “digital” representation(s) merely attempts to tie the claims to a technological environment, but merely reciting that the representation(s) are digital does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or provide an inventive concept.
Claim 8 recites “wherein emission data comprises data related to an environmental footprint, wherein the environmental footprint relates to a product, a company, a process, a raw material, a chemical product, a component, a component assembly, an end product or combinations thereof”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claim 9 recites “wherein the emission data includes data relating to the carbon footprint of the chemical product”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claim 10 recites “wherein the chemical product passport is associated with emission data that includes access restricted emission data associated with the physical entity of the chemical product”, which specifies further steps related to determining a predicted value, but does not make the claims any less abstract.
Claims 13 and 17 merely recite “A chemical product associated with the chemical product passport”, which adds nothing of significance to the material of the parent claims, as it does not alter the process claimed in the parent claims.
Claims 14 and 18 merely recite “A chemical product associated with the chemical product passport”, which adds nothing of significance to the material of the parent claims, as it does not alter the process claimed in the parent claims.
The claims do not provide any new additional limitations or meaningful limits beyond abstract idea that are not addressed above in the independent claims therefore, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor do they provide significantly more to the abstract idea. Thus, after considering all claim elements, both individually and as a whole, it has been determined that the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Therefore, Claims 2-10, 13, 14, and 16-18 are ineligible.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wollack et al. (WO 2020252013 A1).
In regards to Claims 1, 11, 14, 15, 18, and 19, Wollack discloses:
An apparatus for generating a chemical product passport, the apparatus comprising: one or more computing nodes; and one or more computer-readable media having thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, cause the apparatus to perform the following steps: (Claim 1); A computer-implemented method for generating a chemical product passport, the method comprising the steps: (Claim 11); or A computer element with instructions, which when executed on one or more computing node(s) is configured to carry out the steps of the method (Claims 15 and 19) (see at least [0070]-[0073]; [0088], describes all of the recited computers, computer components, and apparatuses, including those used to perform recited methods)
receiving a request to provide a decentral identifier associated with emission data and a data owner[;] ([0046], the information in the blockchain ledger includes multiple types of information about the chemical (representing a chemical passport, including emissions data) and producer (data owner) information (one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the blockchain ledger is decentralized, since it is not controlled or used by a single entity (see also [0039]; [0052], “The unique product identifiers may, in some embodiments, each be a globally unique identifier (GUID) or universally unique identifier (UUID) with respect to all other identifiers used in blockchain entries across a number of different fabricators.”; [0052], requests for information regarding an identifier (that includes chemical passport and owner information) can be received by multiple interested parties;)
in response to the request, generating the chemical product passport including the decentral identifier and data related to the emission data; ([0052], requests for information regarding an identifier (that includes chemical passport and owner information) can be received by multiple interested parties; [0046], the information in the blockchain ledger includes multiple types of information about the chemical (representing a chemical passport) and producer (data owner) information (one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the blockchain ledger is decentralized, since it is not controlled or used by a single entity (see also [0039]; [0052], “The unique product identifiers may, in some embodiments, each be a globally unique identifier (GUID) or universally unique identifier (UUID) with respect to all other identifiers used in blockchain entries across a number of different fabricators.”)
providing the chemical product passport for access by a data consuming service under control by a data providing service associated with the data owner ([0052], requests for information regarding an identifier (that includes chemical passport and owner information) can be received by multiple interested parties; [0043], example of a data consuming service (auditor, lifecycle analysis service) that receives data from the data providing service associated with the owner the owner (block chain service associated with owners of information provides the information))
In regards to Claim 2, Wollack discloses:
wherein the decentral identifier is provided by one central node or by one or more decentral nodes ([0052], the data from the (decentralized blockchain) would be provided by a decentralized node)
In regards to Claims 3 and 16, Wollack discloses:
wherein the decentral identifier is provided to a node generating the chemical product passport and to at least one authentication data registry ([0052], the chemical passport information comes from the node in which it is saved (indicating that the identifier would be provided to that node) and may require authorization (authentication))
In regards to Claims 4, 13, and 17, Wollack discloses:
wherein the generation of the chemical product passport includes providing the decentral identifier associated with a physical entity of a product ([0038]; [0046]; [0052], the product information associated an owner and chemical passport information can also be associated with the physical product produced by the owner (producer, fabricator, vendor), it is noted that [0038] provides an additional example of using a code (identifier) associated with (or attached to) a physical product that can be used to retrieve chemical passport information from the blockchain (a physical entity may relate to the physical embodiment of a product))
In regards to Claim 5, Wollack discloses:
wherein the chemical product passport includes one or more authentication mechanisms associated with the decentral identifier and the data related to emission data ([0052], the chemical includes at least one authentication mechanism required to access the chemical passport ( “…may be configured to respond to requests to retrieve information from the blockchain if sufficient information (such as authorization information, if required in the given embodiment) has been provided in association with the request, according to known methods in the field of blockchains and other distributed ledgers.”))
In regards to Claim 6, Wollack discloses:
wherein the chemical product passport is related to one or more authorization mechanisms associated with the decentral identifier and the data related to emission data([0052], the chemical is related to at least one authentication mechanism required to access the chemical passport ( “…may be configured to respond to requests to retrieve information from the blockchain if sufficient information (such as authorization information, if required in the given embodiment) has been provided in association with the request, according to known methods in the field of blockchains and other distributed ledgers.”))
In regards to Claim 7, Wollack discloses:
wherein the data related to emission data includes one or more digital representation(s) pointing to emission data or parts thereof (Fig. 4B; [0015]; [0059]-[0061], shows example of a response provided to an interface that provides a digital representation that includes emissions data)
In regards to Claim 8, Wollack discloses:
wherein emission data comprises data related to an environmental footprint, wherein the environmental footprint relates to a product, a company, a process, a raw material, a chemical product, a component, a component assembly, an end product or combinations thereof ([0042], tracks environmental impact (footprint), including each stage of production, raw materials, end materials, etc. (environmental impact is also discussed elsewhere throughout the reference))
In regards to Claim 9, Wollack discloses:
wherein the emission data includes data relating to the carbon footprint of the chemical product ([0054], emissions data includes carbon that is consumed or produced (indicating a carbon footprint))
In regards to Claim 10, Wollack discloses:
wherein the chemical product passport is associated with emission data that includes access restricted emission data associated with the physical entity of the chemical product ([0054], the passport information can include emissions data (as described above); [0052], the access to information may require authorization (access restricted emission data), this access restricted data would include any emissions data; [0038]; [0046]; [0052], the product information is also associated with the physical product (as described above))
In regards to Claims 12 and 20, Wollack discloses:
receiving a request to access emission data associated with a decentral identifier of the chemical product passport as generated according to the method of claim 11; (as described in claim 11, see above)
optionally authenticating and/or authorizing the request to access the emission data; ([0054], the passport information can include emissions data (as described above); [0052], the access to information may require authorization (access restricted emission data), if required (i.e. optional), this access restricted data would include any emissions data)
based on optionally the authentication and/or authorization, providing access to emission data associated with the decentral identifier of the chemical product passport ([0054], the passport information can include emissions data (as described above); [0052], the access to information may require authorization (access restricted emission data), if required (i.e. optional), this access restricted data would include any emissions data that is provided for the request)
Additional Relevant Prior Art
Bai et al. (WO 2022225446 A1). Discloses the use of chemical product and owner data in decentralized data system (blockchain) (see at least [0013]; [0041]; [0187]; Claim 2).
Gamboa et al. (Pub. No. US 2011/0213506 A1). Discloses “a sensor element that is operatively connected to the electric element and adapted to generate emission savings data representative of electrical energy units directed from the generator to the output node, a memory in which unique sensor-ID data are stored, a processor unit that is adapted to time-stamp the emission savings data by combining it with the time data and that is adapted to combine the sensor-ID data with the emission data to from savings profile data, and a communication interface that is adapted to communicate the savings profile data directly or indirectly to a network system” (see at least [0010]; [0118]; [0163]-[0194]).
Miao et al. (CN 111539722 A). “The invention claims a carbon trading system and method based on block chain, comprising a carbon emission obtaining module obtaining carbon behaviour data, generating carbon emission data; the carbon behaviour data comprises at least one of carbon consumption and carbon emission reduction behaviour; the carbon transaction module adds time point to the carbon action data and processes it into distributed carbon transaction bill; the block chain module configures the carbon transaction bill for each block chain node; the carbon transaction management module confirms the carbon transaction and carbon transaction data between the different buyer and seller of each block chain node in the block chain module and stores the carbon transaction data; The invention is combined with the carbon transaction by block chain technology, using decentralization of block chain technology, transparentizing, non-falsification, non-forgery and system autonomy and so on; it can realize the carbon asset and carbon emission right of the energy-saving enterprise with high energy consumption carbon emission enterprise and green energy saving in real time, transparent, non-tampering block chain carbon asset management, providing technical support for future carbon financial arrival” (Abstract).
Vivier (Pub. No. US 2019/0043008 A1). Discloses “The one or more processors may perform an analysis on the product using an analysis technique. The analysis technique may be used to determine a chemical identity of the product. The chemical identity may uniquely identify the product with respect to a plurality of other products from origins differing from the origin of the product. The one or more processors may determine, from the chemical identity, an attribute of the product. The attribute may be an identifier for the product. The one or more processors may create a block or a transaction of a blockchain for the product. The block or the transaction may store the information regarding the product, information identifying the chemical identity of the product, information identifying the attribute of the product, or information identifying a quantity of the product. The blockchain may be accessible during transportation of the product to the destination. The blockchain may be analyzed during transportation of the product to the destination to verify the attribute or the chemical identity” (see at least [0002]; [0014]-[0025]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAUN D SENSENIG whose telephone number is (571)270-5393. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10:00am-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, Lynda Jasmin can be reached at 571-272-6872. 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.
/S.D.S/Examiner, Art Unit 3629
July 29, 2026
/LYNDA JASMIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights