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 .
Summary
This Final Office Action in response to the communication received on January 5, 2026.
Claims 1, 3-4, 11, and 13-14 have been amended.
Claims 8-10 and 18-20 have been cancelled.
Claims 1-7 and 11-17 are pending.
The effective filing date of the claimed invention is June 12, 2024, which is a continuation of application 17/001,021 with effective filing date August 24, 2020, and is a continuation of application 15/976,574 with effective filing date May 10, 2018.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to Claims 1, 3-4, 11,and 13-14 are acknowledged.
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 1-7 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1 – Statutory Categories
As indicated in the preamble of the claim, the examiner finds the claim is directed to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.(Claims 1-7 are processes and Claims 11-17 are machines). Accordingly, step 1 is satisfied.
Step 2A – Prong 1: was there a Judicial Exception Recited
Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 11) recites the following abstract concepts that are found to include “abstract idea.” Any additional elements will be analyzed under Step 2A-Prong 2 and Step 2B:
A computer-implemented method of managing data related to an agricultural process, the method comprising:
causing, by a processor, display of a first interface including a first map of one or more agricultural fields, the first map indicating one or more of a plurality of types of farming data associated with the one or more agricultural fields (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
arranging, by the processor, a plurality of icons in the first interface over at least part of the first map, wherein the plurality of icons cover at least part of the first map to thereby facilitate selection of one of the icons by a user while viewing the first map (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
receiving, by the processor, a first selection input, form the user, to the first interface of one of the plurality of icons for analysis of one or more of the plurality of types of farming data associated with the one or more agricultural fields included in the first map (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); and
in response to the first selection input, automatically removing the plurality of icons form over the at least part of the first map so that the user can view an entirety of the first map (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); and then
receiving, by the processor, a second selection input, by the user, to the first map, the second selection input designating a boundary of a region of the one or more agricultural fields (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
in response to the second selection input:
illustrating, by the processor, the boundary of the region of the one or more agricultural fields on the first map (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
performing the analysis identified by the first selection input of one or more of the plurality of types of farming data specific to the region of the one or more agricultural fields identified by the second selection input, the analysis having a plurality of components (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); and
generating and displaying in real time a second interface, overlayed on the first interface of the first map of the one or more agricultural fields, the second interface indicating a first component of the plurality of components of the analysis specific to the region of the one or more agricultural fields, wherein the second interface includes the first component separated by at least seed types planted in the region (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016));
receiving, by the processor, a third selection input, by the user, to the second interface of one of the seed types (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)); and
in response to the third selection input, generating and displaying in real time a third interface, in place of the second interface, which includes the first component for only the selected one of the seed types (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) mental processes, a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A. 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016)).
Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 11) is directed to a series of steps for displaying components of an analysis of agricultural fields specific to a selected region, which are mental processes. The mere nominal recitation of a processor and interfaces does not take the claim out of mental processes. Thus, Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 11) recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong 2: Can the Judicial Exception Recited be integrated into a practical application
Limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition – see Vanda Memo
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using 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 - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application:
Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f)
Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception - see MPEP 2106.05(g)
Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h)
The identified abstract idea of exemplary Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 11) is not integrated into a practical application. The additional elements are: a processor and interfaces that implements the underlying abstract idea. These additional elements are broadly recited computer elements that do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f).
Accordingly, alone and in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 11) is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B – Significantly More Analysis
Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 11) does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and in combination, steps a) causing display of a first interface including a first map of agricultural fields, b) arranging icons in a first interface, c) receiving a first selection input, d) automatically removing the plurality of icons from over at least part of a map, e) receiving a second selection input designating a boundary region of the agricultural fields, f) illustrating the boundary on the first map, g) performing the analysis identified by the first selection input of the types of farming data specific to the region, h) generating and displaying in real time a second interface overlayed on the first interface of the first map indicating a first component of the analysis specific to the region, i) receiving a third selection input to the second interface, and j) generating and displaying in real time a third interface, do not add significantly more to the exception because they amount to merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.05(f). Claim 1 (and similarly Claim 11) is ineligible.
Claim 2 (and similarly Claim 12) recites the abstract idea of mental processes. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Claim 3 (and similarly Claim 13) recites the abstract idea of mental processes. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III). For the additional limitation of a touchscreen device, the examiner refers to the "apply it" rationale of MPEP 2106.05(f).
Claim 4 (and similarly Claim 14) recites the abstract idea of mental processes. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III). For the additional limitation of a screen, the examiner refers to the "apply it" rationale of MPEP 2106.05(f).
Claim 5 (and similarly Claim 15) recites the abstract idea of mental processes. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Claim 6 (and similarly Claim 16) recites the abstract idea of mental processes. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Claim 7 (and similarly Claim 17) recites the abstract idea of mental processes. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 11-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pat Pub 2017/0257426 “Wilbur”, in view of US Pat Pub 2009/0313215 “Maizel”, in view of US Pat Pub 2014/0333651 “Cervelli”.
As per Claims 1 and 11, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of managing data related to an agricultural process, the method comprising:
causing, by a processor, display of a first interface including a first map of one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0111] FIG. 7 shows an example diagram of how the AGVERDICT® system 401 allows users to create farm boundaries using either mobiles devices 703 or Internet accessible devices running an Internet browser 705, in accordance with some embodiments of the present invention. Through the Internet browser 705, the user can access an aerial/satellite image of the geographic area that includes their farm, such as by accessing a map server 707.);
receiving, by the processor, a first selection input, from the user, to the first interface for analysis of one or more of the plurality of types of farming data associated with the one or more agricultural fields included in the first map (Wilbur: [0071] Systems and methods are described herein for collection, management, and analysis of agricultural data to generate integrated information and agricultural process prescriptions for a specific terrestrial area identified by geolocation. [0075] In some examples, the data produced and/or accessed by the AGVERDICT® system may be represented in graphical user interfaces (GUIs). The GUIs may form part of a user interface that provides control and access to information, functions for filtering, selection, optimizing and/or sending requests to severs from local computers, portable devices or any computing device that can serve data and/or process data and/or present data in one or more GUIs. [0110] the AGVERDICT® system 401 can be tasked by either the grower 403 or the trusted advisor 601 to perform specified processing operations on selected data sets and/or information for provision to the other party.);
receiving, by the processor, a second selection input, by the user, to the first map, the second selection input designating a boundary of a region of the one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0111] FIG. 7 shows an example diagram of how the AGVERDICT® system 401 allows users to create farm boundaries using either mobiles devices 703 or Internet accessible devices running an Internet browser 705, in accordance with some embodiments of the present invention. Through the Internet browser 705, the user can access an aerial/satellite image of the geographic area that includes their farm, such as by accessing a map server 707. Then, the user can draw boundaries of their field on the image. The field boundaries can be stored in the database 315 as one or more polygon shapes using a particular geometry data type. Also, in some embodiments, the user can upload a shapefile of previously created field boundaries to the AGVERDICT® system 401 for storage in the database 315.);
in response to the second selection input:
performing the analysis identified by the first selection input of one or more of the plurality of types of farming data specific to the region of the one or more agricultural fields identified by the second selection input, the analysis having a plurality of components (Wilbur: The AGVERDICT® system 401 is configured to use different data points, such as soil samples, electrical conductivity data, historical yield data, weather predictions, market trends, and external data analytical engines to aid the grower in making planting decisions, such as in selecting the right crop to plant and the best variety/hybrid of crop to plant. The AGVERDICT® system 401 is also configured to use different data points to guide the grower in essentially any agricultural process, such as soil preparation, planting, growing, pest control, irrigation, harvest, etc. and [0129] User of the AGVERDICT® system 401 can use the data returned from the controllers to perform analysis and correct their agricultural management strategies. Also, growers/users can collect new data from the field and supply this new data to the AGVERDICT® system 401, thereby creating a closed-loop of data collection, analysis and decision making.).
Wilbur fails to disclose a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of managing data related to an agricultural process, the method comprising:
the first map indicating one or more of a plurality of types of farming data associated with the one or more agricultural fields;
arranging, by the processor, a plurality of icons in the first interface over at least part of the first map, wherein the plurality of icons cover at least part of the first map to thereby facilitate selection of one of the icons by a user while viewing the first map;
in response to the first selection input, automatically removing the plurality of icons from over the at least part of the first map so that the user can view an entirety of the first map;
in response to the second selection input:
illustrating, by the processor, the boundary of the region of the one or more agricultural fields on the first map;
generating and displaying in real time a second interface, overlayed on the first interface of the first map of the one or more agricultural fields, the second interface indicating a first component of the plurality of components of the analysis specific to the region of the one or more agricultural fields, wherein the second interface includes the first component separated by at least seed types planed in the region;
receiving, by the processor, a third selection input, by the user, to the second interface of one of the seed types; and
in response to the third selection input, generating and displaying in real time a third interface, in place of the second interface, which includes the first component for only the selected one of the seed types.
Maizel teaches a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of managing data related to an agricultural process, comprising:
the first map indicating one or more of a plurality of types of farming data associated with the one or more agricultural fields (Maizel: [0067] Referring to FIG. 4, it can be understood how different GIS and geospatial map displays can be integrated into one embodiment of the system. In order to facilitate identification of an initial agronomic target (7), some selection capability can be provided. In FIG. 4, this embodiment depicts a boundary highlighted display (53). The user may use the boundary highlighted display (53) to select a single parcel. This parcel may then be displayed in a selectable pull down menu, such as the RFarm/VFarm display (54). This display and its drop-down menus may permit selection of various different displays as indicated by the click flow arrows shown. For instance, by selecting the RFarm portion, the user may be able to show tracts, crops, and other aspects in a zoomable display. This zoomable display may be a multiple simultaneous zoomed geo-spatial agronomic image display (42) as indicated in FIG. 4. Such displays can be selected and indicated with overlay information at various levels. Maps of roads, cities, water and other basic layers, as well as geo-referenced grower locations and farm field boundaries can be used. Further, in embodiments a change in scale or other effect can be effected (zoom in or out or panning). Visibility and/or styling of the various map layers may automatically change as appropriate for the scale. The RFarm/Farm menu display (54) can provide access to the various functions, Data may be accessed through the menu interface or by clicking on various map objects using one of the map tools.); and
in response to the second selection input:
illustrating, by the processor, the boundary of the region of the one or more agricultural fields on the first map (Maizel: [0061] In such embodiments of the invention the system may itself generate a data estimate or an estimated map depiction. In but one example, this may be indicated by outlining the field information in various displays. As such, the system may effectively include an imputed boundary generator (35). Such an imputed boundary generator (35) may be programming or a subroutine within a microprocessor or the like and so this is also depicted as an internal component in the relationally-linked agronomic search processor (2) as shown in FIGS. 1 and 2.);
generating and displaying in real time a second interface, overlayed on the first interface of the first map of the one or more agricultural fields, the second interface indicating a first component of the plurality of components of the analysis specific to the region of the one or more agricultural fields, wherein the second interface includes the first component separated by at least seed types planted in the region (Maizel: [0044] Land attributes, and even particular management practices can be considered, searched, congregated, and even accumulated. information relative to the use of nutrients or hybrid seeds can be congregated. Similarly, various crop practices such as rotation of fields, rows/foot, seed densities, crop alternation techniques, or other aspects can be searched, analyzed, considered, or congregated to understand relationships between entities and to better predict outcomes or the like. [0067] Referring to FIG. 4, it can be understood how different GIS and geospatial map displays can be integrated into one embodiment of the system. In order to facilitate identification of an initial agronomic target (7), some selection capability can be provided. In FIG. 4, this embodiment depicts a boundary highlighted display (53). The user may use the boundary highlighted display (53) to select a single parcel. This parcel may then be displayed in a selectable pull down menu, such as the RFarm/VFarm display (54). This display and its drop-down menus may permit selection of various different displays as indicated by the click flow arrows shown. For instance, by selecting the RFarm portion, the user may be able to show tracts, crops, and other aspects in a zoomable display. This zoomable display may be a multiple simultaneous zoomed geo-spatial agronomic image display (42) as indicated in FIG. 4. Such displays can be selected and indicated with overlay information at various levels. Maps of roads, cities, water and other basic layers, as well as geo-referenced grower locations and farm field boundaries can be used. Further, in embodiments a change in scale or other effect can be effected (zoom in or out or panning). Visibility and/or styling of the various map layers may automatically change as appropriate for the scale. The RFarm/Farm menu display (54) can provide access to the various functions, Data may be accessed through the menu interface or by clicking on various map objects using one of the map tools.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wilbur to include overlaying a second interface over a first interface as taught by Maizel, with the data management of an agricultural process as taught by Wilbur with the motivation to allow analysis of key agricultural or other data sets in an efficient manner (Maizel: [0011]).
Wilbur and Maizel fail to disclose a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of managing data related to an agricultural process, the method comprising:
arranging, by the processor, a plurality of icons in the first interface over at least part of the first map, wherein the plurality of icons cover at least part of the first map to thereby facilitate selection of one of the icons by a user while viewing the first map;
in response to the first selection input, automatically removing the plurality of icons from over the at least part of the first map so that the user can view an entirety of the first map;
receiving, by the processor, a third selection input, by the user, to the second interface of one of the seed types; and
in response to the third selection input, generating and displaying in real time a third interface, in place of the second interface, which includes the first component for only the selected one of the seed types.
Cervelli teaches a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of managing data related to an agricultural process, the method comprising:
arranging, by the processor, a plurality of icons in the first interface over at least part of the first map, wherein the plurality of icons cover at least part of the first map to thereby facilitate selection of one of the icons by a user while viewing the first map (Cervelli: Fig. 2C and [0075] FIG. 2C illustrates a sample user interface of the map system in which various objects are displayed, according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. The user interface of FIG. 2C includes a map interface 214, an outlined feature 216, and feature information box 114 indicating that the outlined feature 216 is called "Union Park." Various features/objects may be seen in the map interface 214 including, for example, roads, buildings, terrain, street lights (represented by a streetlight icon), railroads, hotels/motels (represented by a bed icon), and schools (represented by a parent-child icon), among other features.);
in response to the first selection input, automatically removing the plurality of icons from over the at least part of the first map so that the user can view an entirety of the first map (Cervelli: Fig. 3A and [0076] FIG. 3A illustrates a sample user interface of the map system in which objects are selected, according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. The user interface of FIG. 3A includes a highlighted user selection rectangle 302. The highlighted user selection rectangle 302 illustrates the user actively selecting a particular region of the map interface so as to select the features/objects that fall within the bounds of that rectangle. In an embodiment, visible features may be selected by the user, while features that are not currently visible are not selectable. For example, features related to layers that are not currently active are not selected when the user performs a selection. In another embodiment, even features that are not visible in a selected area may be selected.);
receiving, by the processor, a third selection input, by the user, to the second interface of one of the seed types (Cervelli: [0079] In an embodiment, the user of the map system may select a subset of the selected features for further analysis and/or histogram generation. For example, the user may select a subset comprising selected objects belonging to the road category by, for example, clicking on the roads item 308. This selection may result in "drilling down" to histograms of that subset of features, as shown in FIG. 3C. Thus, a drill-down group of features/objects (for example, the subset of features/objects) may be used by the map system to determine new drill-down metadata categories, or buckets of related metadata. At 314 in FIG. 3C, the arrow icon indicates that of the originally selected 124,172 features, the feature histogram now shows an analysis of the 6,724 features belonging to the road category (see item 316). The feature histogram window of FIG. 3C thus shows a new set of histograms organized by layer, address, addressed, and agency, among others. The user may thus "drill down" and "drill up" through the selected features via the displayed histograms. [0110] Server-side operations of the map system may include composing and updating the map tiles that make up the map interface. For example, when the user changes the selection of the base layer and/or one or more of the vector layers, the map tiles are re-composed and updated in the map interface to reflect the user's selection. Selection of objects resulting in highlighting of those objects may also involve re-composition of the map tiles.); and
in response to the third selection input, generating and displaying in real time a third interface, in place of the second interface, which includes the first component for only the selected one of the seed types (Cervelli: [0110] Server-side operations of the map system may include composing and updating the map tiles that make up the map interface. For example, when the user changes the selection of the base layer and/or one or more of the vector layers, the map tiles are re-composed and updated in the map interface to reflect the user's selection. Selection of objects resulting in highlighting of those objects may also involve re-composition of the map tiles.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wilbur and Maizel to include the details of the interfaces as taught by Cervelli, with the data management of an agricultural process as taught by Wilbur and Maizel with the motivation to provide, among other features, high-performance, interactive geospatial and/or data object map capabilities in which large amounts of geographical, geospatial, and other types of data, geodata, objects, features, and/or metadata are efficiently presented to a user on a map interface (Cervelli: [0005]).
As per Claims 2 and 12, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the plurality of types of farming data includes seed hybrid data, planting data, soil preparation data, fertilizer application data, irrigation data, harvest data, or grain drying data (Wilbur: [0090]).
As per Claims 3 and 13, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the selection input is a free-form drawing input, at a touchscreen device, to the first map designating the boundary of the region of the one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0111]).
As per Claims 4 and 14, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the selection input includes an interaction with a screen showing the first map to designate the boundary of the region of the one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0111]).
As per Claims 5 and 15, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the analysis includes a return-on-investment (RoI) analysis specific to the region of the one or more agricultural fields having the plurality of components; and wherein the plurality of components includes cost data associated with a first one of the plurality of types of farming data, revenue data, and RoI data specific to the region (Wilbur: [0071]).
As per Claims 6 and 16, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the second interface further includes at least one of: an area of the region of the one or more agricultural fields and/or a yield of the region of the one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0115]).
As per Claims 7 and 17, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the second interface further includes moisture content for the region of the one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0133]).
As per Claims 8 and 18, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, further comprising receiving, by the processor, a selection input, from the user, to a report option button included in the first interface, prior to receiving the selection input designating the boundary of the region of the one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0209]).
As per Claims 9 and 19, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the second interface includes the first component of the plurality of components of the analysis separated by seed types, soil content, and/or populations of seeds in the region (Wilbur: [0204]).
As per Claims 10 and 20, Wilbur discloses a computer-implemented method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, further comprising:
receiving an input selection of one of the seed types, the soil content, and/or the populations of seeds in the region (Wilbur: [0198]); and
causing, by the processor, display of a third interface, in place of the second interface, which includes the first component of the plurality of components, separated by the other ones of the seed types, the soil content, and/or the populations of seeds in the region, only for the selected one of the seed types, the soil content, and/or the populations of seeds in the region of the one or more agricultural fields (Wilbur: [0198]).
Response to Arguments
35 USC 101
Applicant's arguments filed January 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the independent claims are similar to MPEP 2106.04(a)(1) example vi, relating to a method of rearranging icons on a graphical user interface, which was found to be eligible. While both the example claims and the applicant’s claims are directed to placement of icons within a GUI, there are key differences. In Example vi, the icons are organized based on determined usage levels, and memory allocated to the usage. The icons are then positioned based on that determined usage. The usage detection ties the icons to the technical aspects of a GUI.
Applicant also argues that the claims are eligible for similar reasons to those of Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc., 880 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018). Again, Core Wireless provides a technical improvement by adjusting the display based on the small screen size.
On the other hand, the applicant’s claims alter the GUI based on user selected data. These claims are found to be more analogous to International Business Machines Corporation v. Zillow Group, Inc., (No. 2021-2350, October 17, 2022). The first patent covered a coordinated map display and a list of features display. User input can select a sub-area shape on the map display, which causes list elements within the selected area to be selected in the list display. The second patent related to grouping objects presented for displayed into sets, placing a set into a layer, and visually distinguishing the objects in a layer from the other objects. In both patents, the Federal Circuit found that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of organizing and displaying visual information. The application of the abstract idea to computer interfaces was conventional and did not arise to an inventive concept under step two. Like the Zillow case, the applicant’s claims are found to be directed to the abstract idea of organizing and displaying visual information.
35 USC 103
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed January 5, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-7 and 11-17 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US Pat Pub 2017/0257426 “Wilbur”, in view of US Pat Pub 2009/0313215 “Maizel”, in view of US Pat Pub 2014/0333651 “Cervelli”.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 REVA R MOORE whose telephone number is (571)270-7942. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9:00-6:00.
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, Fahd Obeid can be reached at 571-270-3324. 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.
/REVA R MOORE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3627
/FAHD A OBEID/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights