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 .
Response to Arguments
2. The Amendment filed on July 7, 2026 has been entered. The examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1 and 9 and the cancellation of claim 7.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicant argues features of the invention integrating the abstract ideas into a practical application. The argument centers on the invention being a concrete technical improvement over generic computer functions. The Examiner notes the disclosure of routine data processing functions including image capture, generation of structured and unstructured data and use of OCR and speech-to-text algorithms. Detail of the novel integration of these functions into something leading to a technology improvement are not apparent. A follow on argument claims each feature is not a mental process, but the basis of extracting image highlights, organizing data, transcribing what is read, and summarizing audio/speech from voice or video into data are all activities based observing, evaluating, applying judgement, and applying opinion, each of these mental processes. Although a processor may be faster, it does not change the basis of the processes employed.
A tertiary argument claims that the method of how AI analysis of data is provided. The Examiner counters that the argument states what is analyzed, listing creating a tag tree, keyword lists and executing searches, and not how the analysis is executed. What is required is a disclosure of the algorithm’s use of variables, interactions with inputs, mapping of inputs to predicted outputs and development of any prediction would be disclosed. In addition the specification is silent on the training of the model and how the model learns. To achieve a practical application on the basis of a technological improvement requires significant detail to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to build upon it. This is not apparent in the application at this time.
Arguments claiming an unconventional architecture to process data, categorize using
AI, and visualize using bubble/related networks list features, and although claiming adding
functionality do not disclose what that functionality is.
Arguments for providing ‘significantly more’ cite 4 instances of feature contributions, with conclusory statements not specifically reflected in the specification. Mechanisms cited appear to state routine data processing steps with some sort of trend analysis claimed, but innovation and novelty of these mechanisms either as new architecture or new ways to develop predictions are not disclosed.
A claim of a technological improvement as a practical application requires significant technical disclosure, innovative and novel applications and new ways of using any additional elements. These items appear lacking.
In the absence of a practical application, the invention appears to process data to deliver a result to a screen or interface for a human to act upon, and presents the equivalent of “apply it,” to the use of the abstract idea, applying the idea to a processor. This fails to meet the standard for a practical application.
The rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101 will not be withdrawn.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 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, 9, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims, 1, 9, and 15 are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, abstract idea) without providing significantly more.
Step 1
Step 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis per MPEP § 2106.03, required the claims to be a process, machine, manufacture or a composition of matter. Claims 1, 9, and 15 are directed to a process (method), machine (system), and product/article of manufacture, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A
Claims 1, 9, and 15 are directed to abstract ideas, as explained below.
Prong one of the Step 2A analysis requires identifying the specific limitation(s) in the claim under examination that the examiner believes recites an abstract idea, and determining whether the identified limitation(s) falls within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas of mathematical concepts, mental processes, and certain methods of organizing human activity.
Step 2A-Prong 1
The claims recite the following limitations that are directed to abstract ideas, which can be summarized as being directed to a method, the abstract idea, of predicting trends of product in the cosmetics market based on product data and social data.
Claim 9 discloses: A method for providing cosmetics trend prediction service, (economic principles and practices calculating costs, following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion), the method comprising:
collecting cosmetics-related product data and cosmetics-related social data (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
generating an image by detecting a specific cosmetic from the image, extracting a specific cosmetic image for the detected specific cosmetic, and generating data comprising at least one of a color or a pattern of the detected specific cosmetic from the specific cosmetic image; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
generating data by extracting text from the image or extracting text from the cosmetics-related product data and the cosmetics-related social data; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
classifying the generated data of the cosmetics-related product data and cosmetics-related social data into cosmetics categories, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
generating a tag corresponding to each of the classified cosmetics, wherein generating the tag comprises creating and storing a tag tree by firstly classifying tags by cosmetics, secondly classifying the firstly classified tags by part of each cosmetic, and thirdly classifying the secondly classified tags by characteristics and attributes for a specific part of each cosmetic; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
extracting a keyword from the tag, the cosmetics-related product data, and the cosmetics related social data, wherein extracting the keyword comprises generating a first keyword list by selecting keywords of interest based on the extracted keyword, and generating a second keyword list by combining and configuring the keywords of interest with emphasis keywords or color keywords; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
analyzing and predicting, the cosmetics trend based on the tag and keyword, wherein analyzing and predicting the cosmetics trend comprises setting a search condition based on the first keyword list and the second keyword list, and dynamically executing a search based on the search condition, that inputs a user question about the cosmetics trend and combines keywords corresponding to the user question to create a user-specific search condition; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
based on receiving a request for cosmetics trend prediction service, providing the cosmetics trend prediction service to the user including at least one service item among a cosmetics schema item, a cosmetics-related product data item, a cosmetics-related social data item, a cosmetics keyword item, a cosmetics trend analysis item, and a cosmetics trend prediction item, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
based on receiving a user selection for selecting a service item providing corresponding cosmetics trend prediction information;
when receiving the user selection for selecting the cosmetics schema item, providing a tag tree including a plurality of main tags that firstly classify cosmetics by use, sub tags that secondly classify each main tag by color, composition, and area, and detailed tags that thirdly classify each sub-tag according to detailed information, a user selection box for each tag, a tag add button, and a schema name; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
when receiving the user selection input for selecting the cosmetics-related product data item, providing a plurality of brand tags that firstly classify cosmetics by brand, product tags that secondly classify cosmetics products corresponding to each brand tag, a user-selected tag table, a cosmetics-related image corresponding to the user-selected tag, a keyword table corresponding to the user-selected tag, to go to a relevant site; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
when receiving the user selection for selecting the cosmetics-related social data item, providing a category item classifying cosmetics by category, a social media item classifying cosmetics by social media, a cosmetic type item classifying cosmetics by type, a review author item classified by review author, a review author search term, a user selection for each classification item, a cosmetics image, cosmetics detailed information of cosmetics, and a search result including a keyword for cosmetics; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
when receiving the user selection for selecting the cosmetics keyword item, providing a cosmetics type selection item, a tag filter field for a tag selection, a main keyword, a frequency of appearance of the main keyword, and a table of co-occurrence keywords correspondence to the main keyword; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
when receiving the user selection for selecting the cosmetics trend analysis item, providing an item, a keyword, a cosmetics type, a central tag, sub-tags corresponding to the input central tag, a user selection for each sub-tag, related tags, a user selection for each related tag, and a cosmetics trend visualization; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
when receiving the user selection for selecting the cosmetics trend prediction item, providing a plurality of main tag selection items that categorize cosmetics by use, a sub-tag input field for the main tag selection item, a trend makeup method input field for the input sub-tag, a palette configuration method field for the trend makeup method, a palette number for the palette configuration method, and a formulation input field for the number of palettes; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion), and
when receiving the user selection, the cosmetics trend visualization, providing the cosmetics trend analysis information by visualizing a sub-tag and a related tag corresponding to the central tag, (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion),
Each of these claimed limitations employ: organizing human activity in the form of fundamental economic principles and practices based on mitigating risk and calculating costs, following rules or instructions, conducting commercial or legal interactions including contracts, sales activities or behaviors; performing mental processes including, observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion; and applying mathematical concepts using mathematical formulas, equations, or calculations.
Claims 1 and 15 recite similar abstract ideas as those identified with respect to claim 9.
Thus, the concepts set forth in claims 1, 9, and 15 recite abstract ideas.
Step 2A-Prong 2
As per MPEP § 2106.04, while the claims 1, 9, and 15 recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements such as the method performed by a platform server that includes a processor and is connected with a user terminal and an external server, a user terminal and the external server, wherein the cosmetics-related product data and the cosmetics related social data include at least one of a video, a still image, or a text; highlight-capturing the video, structured data, an extracted image, a still image, optical character recognition, extracting voice from the video and converting the voice into text through speech-to-text, automatic classification, by using an artificial intelligence model, which is pre-trained to automatically classify cosmetics by category, wherein the artificial intelligence model is pre-trained by the platform server, into the artificial intelligence model such that the artificial intelligence model extracts, user terminal to display a main screen, an input field, a button to go to a relevant site; a box, a search word input field, and a search results field containing, a media filter item, a keyword filter item, the form of a bubble or a related network,
these limitations are not sufficient to qualify as a practical application being recited in the claims along with the abstract ideas since these elements are invoked as tools to apply the instructions of the abstract ideas in a specific technological environment. The mere application of an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological field do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP § 2106.05 (f) & (h)).
Evaluated individually, the additional elements do not integrate the identified abstract ideas into a practical application. Evaluating the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually.
The claims do not amount to a “practical application” of the abstract idea because they neither (1) recite any improvements to another technology or technical field; (2) recite any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself; (3) apply the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine; (4) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; (5) provide other meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Accordingly, claims 1, 9, and 15 are directed to abstract ideas.
Step 2B
Claims 1, 9, and 15 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
The analysis above describes how the claims recite the additional elements beyond those identified above as being directed to an abstract idea, as well as why identified judicial exception(s) are not integrated into a practical application. These findings are hereby incorporated into the analysis of the additional elements when considered both individually and in combination.
For the reasons provided in the analysis in Step 2A, Prong 1, evaluated individually, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception.
Evaluating the claim limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. In addition to the factors discussed regarding Step 2A, prong two, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely amount to instructions to implement the identified abstract ideas on a computer.
Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claims 1, 9, and 15 that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, the claims are directed to non-statutory subject matter and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Conclusion
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.
Independent claims 1, 9, and 15 were previously not rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103. Dependent claims have been cancelled.
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure or directed to the state of the art is listed on the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL BOROWSKI whose telephone number is (703)756-1822, and email is michael.borowski@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30.
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.
/MB/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3624
/MEHMET YESILDAG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624
