DETAILED ACTION
The following is a Non-Final Office Action in response to communications filed on June 6th 2024. Claims 1-19 are pending.
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 1-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
In January, 2019 (updated October 2019), the USPTO released new examination guidelines setting forth a two-step inquiry for determining whether a claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter. According to the guidelines, a claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter if:
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis:
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Using the two-step inquiry, it is clear that claim 1 is directed toward non-statutory subject matter, as shown below:
STEP 1: Does claim 10 fall within one of the statutory categories? Yes. The claim is directed toward a process (method) falls within one of the statutory categories.
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon or an abstract idea? Yes, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
With regard to STEP 2A (PRONG 1), the guidelines provide three groupings of subject matter that are considered abstract ideas:
Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations;
Certain methods of organizing human activity – fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions); and
Mental processes – concepts that are practicably performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion).
Regarding claim 1
A method applied to a first device connected to a second device, the method comprising:
displaying a first interface comprising address information; receiving a first user operation;
in response to the first user operation, identifying the address information to determine
intent information, wherein the intent information indicates that a place represented by the address information is a destination for navigation; and
sending the intent information to the second device, wherein the intent information is
used by the second device to display a second interface, and the second interface is used to
provide a user with a navigation service with the place represented by the address information
as the destination.
The method in claim 1 is a mental process that can be practicably performed in the human mind and, therefore, an abstract idea. It merely consists of determining user intent from information and communicating that intent for use in navigation. It is equivalent to a person looking at an address written on a piece of paper, interpreting that address as a destination that the person intends to navigate to and conveying that destination to another person so that navigation instruction may be provided. Notably, the claim does not positively recite any limitations regarding the use of the data in controlling navigation in a specific manner.
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? No, the claim does not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
With regard to STEP 2A (prong 2), whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, the guidelines provide the following exemplary considerations that are indicative that an additional element (or combination of elements) may have integrated the judicial exception into a practical application:
an additional element reflects an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field;
an additional element that applies or uses a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition;
an additional element implements a judicial exception with, or uses a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim;
an additional element effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and
an additional element applies or uses 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 more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
While the guidelines further state that the exemplary considerations are not an exhaustive list and that there may be other examples of integrating the exception into a practical application, the guidelines also list examples in which a judicial exception has not been integrated into a practical application:
an additional element merely recites the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea;
an additional element adds insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; and
an additional element does no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Regarding claim 1
A method applied to a first device connected to a second device, the method comprising:
displaying a first interface comprising address information;
receiving a first user operation;
in response to the first user operation, identifying the address information to determine
intent information, wherein the intent information indicates that a place represented by the
address information is a destination for navigation; and
sending the intent information to the second device, wherein the intent information is
used by the second device to display a second interface, and the second interface is used to
provide a user with a navigation service with the place represented by the address information as the destination.
Claim 1 does not recite any of the exemplary considerations that are indicative of an abstract idea having been integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 merely recites using a first device and a second device to perform generic computer functions, including displaying information, receiving user input, identifying information and transmitting information. These functions are well-understood, routine, and convention activities performed by generic computing devices.
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? No, the claim does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With regard to STEP 2B, whether the claims recite additional elements that provide significantly more than the recited judicial exception, the guidelines specify that the pre-guideline procedure is still in effect. Specifically, that examiners should continue to consider whether an additional element or combination of elements:
adds a specific limitation or combination of limitations that are not well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, which is indicative that an inventive concept may be present; or
simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, which is indicative that an inventive concept may not be present.
Claim 1 does not recite any specific limitation or combination of limitations that are not well-understood, routine, conventional (WURC) activity in the field. Displaying information, receiving user input, and transmitting data are fundamental, i.e. WURC, activities performed by computers.
CONCLUSION
Thus, since claim 1 is: (a) directed toward an abstract idea, (b) does not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, and (c) does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, it is clear that claim 1 is directed towards non-statutory subject matter.
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) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yuan (US 2019/0303088).
Regarding claim 1, Yuan teaches a method applied to a first device connected to a second device, the method comprising: displaying a first interface (Para. [0051]).. an application running on a first device may display a first interface. The first interface is a functional display user interface that is provided by the application.) comprising address information (Para. [0053]…the context information of the first interface includes the content ( e.g., input fields or other interactive elements) that is featured on the first interface and/or associated with the service feature(s) that are provided by the application. In a first example, for a first interface of a positioning and navigation application, the current run status may include the first device's current location (e.g., that is obtained from a geolocation sensor of the first device), a user input start location, a user input destination location…); receiving a first user operation (Para. [0053]… The context information of the first interface may include user inputs ( e.g., user input values, user selections, user made adjustments of settings) that have been received at the first interface…);
in response to the first user operation, identifying the address information to determine intent information (Para. [0126]…an operation request for a needed ride-hailing service is generated by the user tapping a button at the second interface. The user may further input the start-point and end-point addresses as request parameters to the operation request for the ride-hailing service), wherein the intent information indicates that a place represented by the address information is a destination for navigation (Para. [0043]… Interface data 218 includes data associated with the current run status of the first interface, which in this example
may include, for example, the start location and the end location of the navigation route.); and
sending the intent information to the second device, wherein the intent information is used by the second device to display a second interface (Para. [0130]… a user can seamlessly switch from using an application on one device to using the same application on another device and have the current state of the interface that was previously used by the user at the first device be preserved and/or resumed at the second device), and the second interface is used to provide a user with a navigation service with the place represented by the address information as the destination (Para. [0126]…the user may further input the start-point and end-point addresses as request parameters to the operation request for the ride-hailing service.)
Regarding claim 2, Yuan teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the first user operation comprises performing a shake operation, a knuckle tapping operation, a knuckle sliding operation, a multi-finger tapping operation, or a multi-finger sliding operation on the first device (Para. [0097]…triggering by a preset gesture on the first interface. Examples of preset gestures, such as shaking, one or more finger swipes, pressing and holding on an interface blank area, or mid-air gestures, may be used to activate interface transfer services of an application interface from the first device)
Regarding claim 3, Yuan teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the first device is a mobile phone (Fig. 2, Phone, 202), and the second device is a car (Fig. 2, Vehicle-Mounted System 224).
Regarding claim 4, Yuan teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the first interface is a user interface of a chat application (Para. [0129]… an application may be a messaging application. At a first interface of the messaging application that is executing at a smart phone (the first device), the user of the smart phone is chatting with another user, Alice.)
Regarding claim 5, Yuan teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the address information is included in the first interface displayed by the first device in a form of a card or in a form of a text (Fig. 3C, Location 352)
Regarding claim 6, Yuan teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein:
the address information is included in the first interface displayed by the first device in a
form of a card (Fig. 3C); and the method further comprises:
identifying an interface structure of the card and an interface structure of a text box in an interface of a first application (Para. [0077-0079]…the parsing engine includes:
a first parsing engine for parsing interface descriptive information); and determining the address information based on text information (Para. [0077-0079]).
Regarding claims 7-12, please refer to the rejection of claims 1-6 which is commensurate in scope. Claims 1-6 being drawn to a method and 7-12 being drawn to the corresponding device.
Regarding claim 13, Yuan teaches the first device according to claim 7, wherein the first device is a BLUETOOTH headset (Para. [0131]... As for devices that are not Internet enabled, interface data can be transmitted by transmitting markup data between devices via Bluetooth, NFC, or similar technologies that do not require the Internet.)
Regarding claims 14-19, please refer to the rejection of claims 1-6 which commensurate in scope. Claims 1-6 being drawn to a method, Claims 14-19 being drawn to a non-transitory computer-readable storage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JODI M JONES whose telephone number is (571)272-0107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. 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.
/JODI JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666