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
The Amendment filed on January 6, 2026 has been entered. The examiner
acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 7, 9, 15, and the cancellation of claims 2-6, 8, 10-14.
Per the Applicant’s request, the Examiner acknowledges receipt of the certified copy of
the priority document.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicant argues that disclosed features should not be considered to be mental processes or organizing human activity. Examiner notes that the collecting of data from various sources, including those of a social nature are organizing human activity- recognizing and evaluating human inputs, understanding the structures employed, and mental processes- observation, evaluation, judgment and opinion. The hardware and software do not change the underlying processes.
Given underlying abstract ideas, the path to allowable subject matter requires a practical application to be disclosed. The practical application can be summarized as an improvement to the functioning of a computer (or processor) or an improvement to other technology or technical field.
Applicant argues a series of points in claim 1 such as a processor configured to receive data from a user terminal and external server, processing the data and social data, then classifying the data. The Examiner notes that receiving and processing data are the most routine of computer processes. Classifying the data appears nondescript. Thus far, no improvement is apparent and the processor functions can be placed under the heading of insignificant extra-solution activity.
The role of an artificial intelligence model is disclosed as classifying cosmetics by category. Categories provided appear to include “by brand,” “by social media,” “by type,” “by category,” “by review author,” “by use,” and there may be others. The purpose for these categorizations is not provided and the specification only discloses categorization by use. The specification states that the deep neural network enables identification of latent structures in data, citing the structure of a photo, text video, voice or music, and also the content and emotion of the voice. The Examiner does not see a process or progression of steps, describing a purpose for these disclosed elements. Their role in “training” a machine learning model for a “prediction service” is also unclear. The Examiner concludes that the artificial intelligence model is used to organized data, possibly like a spreadsheet, for use in formulating a prediction. Of note, [0021] cites a method for providing the cosmetics trend prediction service, and the method performed by the platform server may include: …and the sentence ends there. The Examiner concludes that details concerning the role, function and training of the artificial intelligence model are lacking to the point that one of ordinary skill in the art would require extensive experimentation to deduce functionality or purpose from the application of this model.
Examination of the claims reveals additional elements that are common computer or information system components, so there does not appear to be a novel application for the additional elements, or control function from the apparatus outside of the aforementioned data processing. Claim 1 states that “based on receiving a request for cosmetics trend prediction from the user terminal, [the system will] provide the cosmetics trend prediction service to the user terminal to display a main screen…” So it appears to the Examiner that the enhanced software, programs, and tools are applied to a processor and a human operator receives the results on a screen with no other apparent function or destination, invoking what the MPEP describes as “Apply it,” where the invention executes instructions to implement the abstract ideas on a computer.
In view of the above, the arguments in favor of a practical application are not compelling thus the subject matter remains ineligible. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 will not be withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant’s amendments to the independent claims overcome previous rejections and no additional art was found to overcome the claims, therefore rejections to the independent claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are withdrawn and dependent claims are not rejected due to their dependence on the independent claims.
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, 7, 9, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims, 1, 7, 9, 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, 7, 9, 15 are directed to a process (method), and product/article of manufacture, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A
Claims 1, 7, 9, 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, comprising: A method for providing cosmetics trend prediction service, (economic principles and practices calculating costs, following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion), the method that includes a 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),
classifying the collected cosmetics-related product data and cosmetics related social data into cosmetics categories, by using model, which is classify cosmetics by category; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
generating a tag and a keyword, which are corresponding to each of classified cosmetics analyzing and predicting, by using model, the cosmetics trend based on the tag and keyword, wherein the model inputs a user question about the cosmetics trend into model; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
based on receiving a request for cosmetics trend prediction service from the user, providing the cosmetics trend prediction service to the user to display 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, (economic principles and practices calculating costs, following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
based on receiving a user selection input for selecting a service item, providing corresponding cosmetics trend prediction information, (economic principles and practices calculating costs, following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities).
when receiving the user selection input 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 input field; (economic principles and practices calculating costs, 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 input 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, an input field for review author search term, a user selection box for each classification item, a cosmetics image, cosmetics detailed information of cosmetics, and a search result field 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 input for selecting the cosmetics keyword item, providing a cosmetics type selection item, a tag filter field for a tag selection, a search word input field, and a search results field containing 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, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities),
when receiving the user selection input for selecting the cosmetics trend analysis item, providing a media filter item, a keyword filter item, a cosmetics type input item, a central tag input item, sub-tags corresponding to the input central tag, a user selection box for each sub-tag, related tags, a user selection box for each related tag, and a cosmetics trend visualization button; (following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion, organizing human activity interactions between people or social activities), and
when receiving the user selection input 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 input field for the input trend makeup method, a palette number input field for the palette configuration method, and a formulation input field for the input number of palettes, (economic principles and practices calculating costs, following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion).
Additional limitations employ the method to provide trend analysis information by visualizing a sub-tag and a related tag in the form of a network diagram, (economic principles and practices calculating costs, following rules or instructions, observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion – claim 7).
Each of these claimed limitations employ: organizing human activity in the form of fundamental economic principles and practices based on calculating costs, following rules or instructions; performing mental processes including, observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion.
Claims 1, 15 recite similar abstract ideas as those identified with respect to claims 7, 9
Thus, the concepts set forth in claims 1, 7, 9, 15 recite abstract ideas.
Step 2A-Prong 2
As per MPEP § 2106.04, while the claims 1, 7, 9, 15 recite additional limitations which are hardware or software elements such as a platform server, a processor connected with a user terminal and an external server, a user terminal, an artificial intelligence model pre-trained by platform server, a main screen including, a button, an apparatus, a non-transitory computer-readable medium, and a program, 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, 7, 9, 15 are directed to abstract ideas.
Step 2B
Claims 1, 7, 9, 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, 7, 9, 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
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.
7. Claim 9 is not rejected by prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Independent claim 1 is not rejected for reasons corresponding to those of claim 9. Dependent claims 7 and 15 are not rejected because of their inherent dependency on claims 9 and 1.
The closest prior art to the invention includes Nobel, (US 20080082399 A1), “Method and System for Collecting, Organizing and Analyzing Emerging Culture Trends that Influence Consumers,” Im, (KR 20210061560 A), “A Method for Predicting Cosmetic Sales Using Artificial Intelligence Based on Weather and Climate Data, and Server Using the Same,” and Wang, “The Impact of K-Beauty Social Media Influencers, Sponsorship, and Product Exposure on Consumer Acceptance of New Products,” Fashion and Textiles, 5 April, 2021.
None of the prior art alone or in combination teach the claimed invention as recited in this claim wherein the novelty is in the combination of all the limitations and not in a single limitation.
Regarding claim 9, A method for providing cosmetics trend prediction service,
the method performed by a platform server that includes a processor and is connected with a user terminal and an external server, the method comprising:
collecting cosmetics-related product data and cosmetics-related social data from the user terminal and the external server;
automatically classifying the collected cosmetics-related product data and cosmetics related social data into cosmetics categories, by using an artificial intelligence model, which is
pre-trained to automatically classify cosmetics by category…
Nobel teaches a predictive model for trends by collecting data from various media sources, websites, blogs, chatrooms or the like related to the information viewed by consumers. Nobel does not utilize artificial intelligence tools for predicting trends, nor does Nobel specifically predict cosmetics-related product sales or usage trends. Im teaches the use of AI as a tool for predicting cosmetics sales based on weather and climate data, but does not employ social media data. Wang teaches the impact of social media influencers on consumer acceptance of products, but does not employ artificial intelligence tools or predict cosmetics-related sales or trends.
These individually or in combination did not teach the complete scope of the claim. The dependent claims 7 and 15 are not rejected because of their inherent dependency on claims 9 and 1.
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL BOROWSKI whose telephone number is (703)756-1822. 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
Prosecution Insights