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 . Claims 1-2 and 4-8 have been reviewed and are under consideration by this office action.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/07/2026 has been entered.
Notice to Applicant
The following is a Non-Final Office action. In response to Examiner’s Final Rejection Applicant amended claims and previously cancelled claim 3. Claims 1-2 and 4-8 are pending in this application and have been rejected below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/09/2026 and 01/27/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments are received and acknowledged.
The 102/103 Rejections were overcome and withdrawn in the Final Office action dated 01/08/2026.
Response to Arguments - 35 USC § 101
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejections have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends that the claims were amended to include requisite detail regarding the machine learning’s systems generation of coefficients to make the claims patent eligible material.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims merely recite a machine learning system, trained on learning (i.e. recited at a high level of generality) and as such the use of the system is performing the steps would be no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and/or amounts to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h).
Applicant further contends that the claims include several instances of applications of the embodiment which highlight the practical application into which the claims integrate the abstract idea.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The abstract idea is identified below and the additional elements are each bolded and addressed. The additional elements fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and further do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The 101 Rejection is updated and maintained below.
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 1-2 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step One - First, pursuant to step 1 in the January 2019 Guidance on 84 Fed. Reg. 53, the claim(s) 1-2 and 4-8 is/are directed to statutory categories.
Step 2A, Prong One – The claims are found to recite limitations that set forth the abstract idea(s), namely in independent claims recite a series of steps for the abstract idea recited below.
Regarding Claim(s) 1 and 8, (additional elements bolded)
An information processing method executed by an information processing apparatus, the method comprising the steps of/ An information processing apparatus comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory, the non-transitory memory storing a program containing instructions which, when the processor executes the instructions, cause the processor to execute a method comprising:
acquiring first contract information and insurance contract information on a contract relating to an infrastructure development project for development of infrastructure including existing buildings of logistics facilities, factories, and offices, the first contract information being related to a first performance-linked contract in which a payment is made based on disaster mitigation performance accomplished through the infrastructure and the insurance contract information being related to a disaster insurance contract for the infrastructure,
wherein the first performance-linked contract is a contract for strengthening of buildings for business continuity planning (BCP) for companies and organizations in emergency situations;
acquiring probability data, indicating the probability of occurrence of a disaster announced by organizations that study the occurrence of disasters, from a plurality of cases;
transmitting, to a fund provider including investors, second contract information on a second performance- linked contract in which a payment is made based on the disaster mitigation performance of the first performance-linked contract;
receiving, from the fund provider, condition information containing a payment condition regarding the payment determined based on the second contract information;
receiving first to third coefficients from a machine learning system, trained on learning data including the probability data from a plurality of cases, a contract period, an amount of money corresponding to the disaster mitigation performance, and development costs from a plurality of cases, and the first to third coefficients, wherein:
the first coefficient is a coefficient applied to an insurance fee to obtain remuneration paid to the fund provider, wherein;
the second coefficient is a coefficient applied to performance remuneration for disaster mitigation to obtain the performance remuneration paid to the fund provider based on the second contract information, wherein;
the third coefficient is a coefficient responsive to the first contract information on the first performance-linked contract containing a contract period and an amount of money
corresponding to the disaster mitigation performance, the third coefficient being applied to the amount of money corresponding to the disaster mitigation performance responsive to the infrastructure being damaged during the contract period, at least based on the contract period and the amount of money corresponding to the disaster mitigation performance, wherein the larger the amount of money corresponding to the disaster mitigation performance or the longer the contract period is, the lower the third coefficient may be;
including the set first coefficient in the insurance contract information, the set second coefficient in the first contract information and the set third coefficient in the second contract information;
acquiring, from the fund provider, funding data regarding funds to be set based on the infrastructure development project first contract information;
responsive to acquiring the funding data, specifying an executor of the infrastructure development project upon acquiring the funding data; and
responsive to acquiring the funding data, specifying an executor of the infrastructure development project using identifying information of an infrastructure development business stored in a memory of the information processing apparatus, wherein the executor includes a construction company or design company executing the infrastructure development business; and
responsive to acquiring the funding data and specifying the executor, transmitting, to the executor, order information on the infrastructure development project, the order information including construction method, delivery date, and cost for strengthening of the buildings.
Further regarding Claim 7, A non-transitory recording medium storing a program for causing an information apparatus to perform the method of claim 1.
As drafted, this is, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, within the Abstract idea groupings of “Mental processes—concepts performed in the human mind” (observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) as the claims are directed towards at least acquiring contract and insurance information, acquiring probability and funding data, receiving condition information, applying coefficients, and specifying an executor all of which are concepts capable of being performed in the human mind (i.e. via pen and paper).
Further the claims are directed towards the abstract idea grouping of “Certain methods of organizing human activity” — commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations) and/or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) as the claims are directed towards disaster mitigation for organizations and performance-linked contracts. (See Specification, [05]).
Step 2A, Prong Two - This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The independent claims utilize at least the additional elements bolded above. The additional elements are performing the steps would be no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. See MPEP 2106.05(f) and/or amounts to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h).
Step 2B - The claim does not include additional elements 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 elements are just “apply it” on a computer. (See MPEP 2106.05(f) – Mere Instructions to Apply an Exception – “Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible.” Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 235) and/or amounts to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP 2106.05(h). Examiner further notes that the transmitting steps are an activity that has been recognized by the courts as well-understood, routine, and conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(d) i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362)
Regarding Claim(s) 2, 4, 5, and 6 the claim further narrows the abstract idea or recite additional elements previously addressed in the independent claims.
Accordingly, the claim fails to recite any improvements to another technology or technical field, improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, use of a particular machine, effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application, and/or meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular environment. See 84 Fed. Reg. 55. Viewed individually or as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY L GUNN whose telephone number is (571)270-1728. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30-4:30.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached on (571) 272-6787. 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.
/JEREMY L GUNN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights