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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Application filed on 8/12/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending for this examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the People’s Republic of China on 11/09/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202311491878.5 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Examiner notes that the IFW has a priority document exchange failure status report dated 4/09/2025, where an attempt by the office to electronically retrieve the CN202311491878.5 priority document was made but failed. Examiner requests Applicants to look into and address this priority document issue.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 8/28/2024; 1/27/2025; 5/02/2025; and 12/31/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a “computer-readable storage medium” is defined in the specification, Paragraph 0133, with indefinite language which does not limit the scope of invention to just tangible embodiment.
More specifically, in view of Applicant’s disclosure, specification Paragraph 0133, the “computer-readable storage medium may be, but not limited to, an electric, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus or device, or any combination thereof”, where “specific examples of the computer-readable storage medium may include but not be limited to: an electrical connection with one or more wires, a portable computer disk, a hard disk, a random-access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), an optical fiber, a compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any appropriate combination of them”, with another line later saying that “the computer-readable storage medium may be any tangible medium containing or storing a program that can be used by or in combination with an instruction execution system, apparatus or device”.
Examiner points out that multiple time it is noted in the specification (underlined above) that the listed elements are not limiting, meaning that the definition can be expanded to include both tangible embodiments, and intangible embodiments. Furthermore, some of the specific examples includes “an electrical connection with one or more wires” and “optical fiber”, where Examiner points out that these can be interpreted as a plug / socket and a wire, both of which traditionally do not have storage mediums within to hold data but are merely mediums for electronic data to be transmitted through, thus not falling under the “tangible medium containing or storing a program” as talked about in Applicants specification as a medium for transmission as understood in the art is not something that contains or stores programs as required by Applicant’s definition. As such, the claims are not limited to statutory subject matter and are therefore considered as non-statutory.
Claims 1-20 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.
Regarding claim 1, under the Alice framework Step 1, the claim recites a method, which falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 USC 101: a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Under the Alice framework Step 2A prong 1, claim 1 recites an abstract idea in the grouping of mental processes. The claim recites acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object, performing a community division on the target relationship network to obtain a plurality of first node communities comprising at least one node in the target relationship network, and determining the first node community to which the first object belongs as shown below in underlined text:
Claim 1. A data processing method, comprising:
acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object according to a first operation for the first object, wherein the target relationship network is configured to represent an association relationship between a plurality of objects through a node network relationship;
controlling a plurality of threads to perform a community division on the target relationship network in parallel using locks implemented based on an atomic operation instruction, to obtain a plurality of first node communities, wherein each of the first node communities comprises at least one node in the target relationship network; and
determining the first node community to which the first object belongs according to an association relationship between the first object and objects corresponding to nodes in the target relationship network.
Examiner points out that the method of acquiring relationship network, dividing the relationship network into a plurality of first node communities, and making a determination of which first node community a first object belongs to are things which would fall under the grouping of mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind including observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion), which is something that can be done by a human without a computer / algorithms. More specifically, another way of wording the existing claim language is that a network of locations / nodes is obtained (something like receiving a list or locations / nodes), a community division is performed to sort / classify / group the network of locations / nodes into smaller communities (something like forming groups based on same classifications / similar types, etc.), and a determination is made to which of the smaller communities an object belongs to (selecting where to place the first object based on similarities with other groups / communities), which would make the claim language similar to a sorting operation where a large group of locations / nodes is subdivided into groups / classifications and deciding where to place the first object based on the groupings / classifications. Sorting / classification / grouping of items is in the realm of cognitive categorization (see “To Cognize is to Categorize: Cognition is Categorization” by Harnad, Stevan dated 2005 showing that the idea of categorizing and sorting was at least knowledge known at the time of invention; also see Cognitive Categorization, available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/cognitive_categorization, which has a wayback machine entry archived 6/30/2024 which would not apply as prior art due to the date, but includes many cited references that do predate the effective filing date of the instant application), where objects and events can be grouped / sorted to simply their understanding, i.e. grouping things based on common characteristics between items such as grouping nodes based on location or grouping nodes based on functionality / hardware provided at node. Therefore Examiner deems claim 1 to recite an abstract idea in the grouping of mental processes that can be done to sort / categorize nodes into groups and select one of these groups to place the first object into.
Under the Alice framework Step 2A prong 2 analysis, the claim recites additional elements shown below in underlined text:
Claim 1. A data processing method, comprising:
acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object according to a first operation for the first object, wherein the target relationship network is configured to represent an association relationship between a plurality of objects through a node network relationship;
controlling a plurality of threads to perform a community division on the target relationship network in parallel using locks implemented based on an atomic operation instruction, to obtain a plurality of first node communities, wherein each of the first node communities comprises at least one node in the target relationship network; and
determining the first node community to which the first object belongs according to an association relationship between the first object and objects corresponding to nodes in the target relationship network.
With respect to the first operation for a first object, this is highly generic language as an operation with no specific structure recited that would be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of just having an instruction used to implement the method by retrieving information. Similarly, with respect to the plurality of threads in parallel and using locks implemented based on atomic operation instruction, these are also highly generic language that does not recite specific structure that would be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of multiple operations being done at the same time for the purposes of sorting information (for arranging groups / classifications). The usage / executing of instructions to receive data falls under well-understood, routine, and conventional computer functions as recognized in court decisions listed under MPEP 2106.05(d), and executing instructions to perform tasks / operations which invokes a computer or other machinery merely as a tool for performing an existing process is recognized in court decisions listed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
For these reasons, claim 1 does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of sorting / grouping.
Furthermore, Examiner notes that claim 1 overall only makes a determination, but does not do anything with the determination. The entire method of claim 1 does the acquiring step and controlling step to make the plurality of first node communities, then makes a determination to which first node community the first object belongs to but does nothing with such information, i.e. there is no end result or anything done with the determination, so it can be interpreted as having no results done after completing this process, which further emphasizes that this claim is a mental process of sorting / grouping without significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding claim 19, under the Alice framework Step 1, the claim recites an electronic device, which falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 USC 101: a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Under the Alice framework Step 2A prong 1, claim 1 recites an abstract idea in the grouping of mental processes. The claim recites acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object, performing a community division on the target relationship network to obtain a plurality of first node communities comprising at least one node in the target relationship network, and determining the first node community to which the first object belongs as shown below in underlined text:
Claim 19. An electronic device, comprising a processor and memory, wherein
the memory stores computer-executable instructions; and
the processor executes the computer-executable instructions stored on the memory to cause a data processing method to be executed;
the data processing method comprises:
acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object according to a first operation for the first object, wherein the target relationship network is configured to represent an association relationship between a plurality of objects through a node network relationship;
controlling a plurality of threads to perform a community division on the target relationship network in parallel using locks implemented based on an atomic operation instruction, to obtain a plurality of first node communities, wherein each of the first node communities comprises at least one node in the target relationship network; and
determining the first node community to which the first object belongs according to an association relationship between the first object and objects corresponding to nodes in the target relationship network.
Examiner points out that the method of acquiring relationship network, dividing the relationship network into a plurality of first node communities, and making a determination of which first node community a first object belongs to are things which would fall under the grouping of mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind including observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion), which is something that can be done by a human without a computer / algorithms. More specifically, another way of wording the existing claim language is that a network of locations / nodes is obtained (something like receiving a list or locations / nodes), a community division is performed to sort / classify / group the network of locations / nodes into smaller communities (something like forming groups based on same classifications / similar types, etc.), and a determination is made to which of the smaller communities an object belongs to (selecting where to place the first object based on similarities with other groups / communities), which would make the claim language similar to a sorting operation where a large group of locations / nodes is subdivided into groups / classifications and deciding where to place the first object based on the groupings / classifications. Sorting / classification / grouping of items is in the realm of cognitive categorization (see “To Cognize is to Categorize: Cognition is Categorization” by Harnad, Stevan dated 2005 showing that the idea of categorizing and sorting was at least knowledge known at the time of invention; also see Cognitive Categorization, available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/cognitive_categorization, which has a wayback machine entry archived 6/30/2024 which would not apply as prior art due to the date, but includes many cited references that do predate the effective filing date of the instant application), where objects and events can be grouped / sorted to simply their understanding, i.e. grouping things based on common characteristics between items such as grouping nodes based on location or grouping nodes based on functionality / hardware provided at node. Therefore Examiner deems claim 19 to recite an abstract idea in the grouping of mental processes that can be done to sort / categorize nodes into groups and select one of these groups to place the first object into.
Under the Alice framework Step 2A prong 2 analysis, the claim recites additional elements shown below in underlined text:
Claim 19. An electronic device, comprising a processor and memory, wherein
the memory stores computer-executable instructions; and
the processor executes the computer-executable instructions stored on the memory to cause a data processing method to be executed;
the data processing method comprises:
acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object according to a first operation for the first object, wherein the target relationship network is configured to represent an association relationship between a plurality of objects through a node network relationship;
controlling a plurality of threads to perform a community division on the target relationship network in parallel using locks implemented based on an atomic operation instruction, to obtain a plurality of first node communities, wherein each of the first node communities comprises at least one node in the target relationship network; and
determining the first node community to which the first object belongs according to an association relationship between the first object and objects corresponding to nodes in the target relationship network.
With respect to the memory storing computer-executable instruction and the processor to execute the computer-executable instructions to cause a data processing method to be executed, these are highly generic elements that are executing instructions to perform tasks / operations which invokes a computer or other machinery merely as a tool for performing an existing process. With respect to the first operation for a first object, this is highly generic language as an operation with no specific structure recited that would be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of just having an instruction used to implement the method by retrieving information. Similarly, with respect to the plurality of threads in parallel and using locks implemented based on atomic operation instruction, these are also highly generic language that does not recite specific structure that would be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of multiple operations being done at the same time for the purposes of sorting information (for arranging groups / classifications). The usage / executing of instructions to receive data falls under well-understood, routine, and conventional computer functions as recognized in court decisions listed under MPEP 2106.05(d), and executing instructions to perform tasks / operations which invokes a computer or other machinery merely as a tool for performing an existing process is recognized in court decisions listed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
For these reasons, claim 19 does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of sorting / grouping.
Furthermore, Examiner notes that claim 19 overall only makes a determination, but does not do anything with the determination. The entire method portion of claim 19 does the acquiring step and controlling step to make the plurality of first node communities, then makes a determination to which first node community the first object belongs to but does nothing with such information, i.e. there is no end result or anything done with the determination, so it can be interpreted as having no results done after completing this process, which further emphasizes that this claim is a mental process of sorting / grouping without significantly more than the abstract idea.
Regarding claim 20, under the Alice framework Step 1, the claim recites a computer-readable storage medium, which falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 USC 101: a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
Under the Alice framework Step 2A prong 1, claim 1 recites an abstract idea in the grouping of mental processes. The claim recites acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object, performing a community division on the target relationship network to obtain a plurality of first node communities comprising at least one node in the target relationship network, and determining the first node community to which the first object belongs as shown below in underlined text:
Claim 20. A computer-readable storage medium, storing computer-executable instructions, wherein upon the computer-executable instructions being executed by a processor, a data processing method is implemented;
the data processing method comprises:
acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object according to a first operation for the first object, wherein the target relationship network is configured to represent an association relationship between a plurality of objects through a node network relationship;
controlling a plurality of threads to perform a community division on the target relationship network in parallel using locks implemented based on an atomic operation instruction, to obtain a plurality of first node communities, wherein each of the first node communities comprises at least one node in the target relationship network; and
determining the first node community to which the first object belongs according to an association relationship between the first object and objects corresponding to nodes in the target relationship network.
Examiner points out that the method of acquiring relationship network, dividing the relationship network into a plurality of first node communities, and making a determination of which first node community a first object belongs to are things which would fall under the grouping of mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind including observation, evaluation, judgement, and opinion), which is something that can be done by a human without a computer / algorithms. More specifically, another way of wording the existing claim language is that a network of locations / nodes is obtained (something like receiving a list or locations / nodes), a community division is performed to sort / classify / group the network of locations / nodes into smaller communities (something like forming groups based on same classifications / similar types, etc.), and a determination is made to which of the smaller communities an object belongs to (selecting where to place the first object based on similarities with other groups / communities), which would make the claim language similar to a sorting operation where a large group of locations / nodes is subdivided into groups / classifications and deciding where to place the first object based on the groupings / classifications. Sorting / classification / grouping of items is in the realm of cognitive categorization (see “To Cognize is to Categorize: Cognition is Categorization” by Harnad, Stevan dated 2005 showing that the idea of categorizing and sorting was at least knowledge known at the time of invention; also see Cognitive Categorization, available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/cognitive_categorization, which has a wayback machine entry archived 6/30/2024 which would not apply as prior art due to the date, but includes many cited references that do predate the effective filing date of the instant application), where objects and events can be grouped / sorted to simply their understanding, i.e. grouping things based on common characteristics between items such as grouping nodes based on location or grouping nodes based on functionality / hardware provided at node. Therefore Examiner deems claim 20 to recite an abstract idea in the grouping of mental processes that can be done to sort / categorize nodes into groups and select one of these groups to place the first object into.
Under the Alice framework Step 2A prong 2 analysis, the claim recites additional elements shown below in underlined text:
Claim 20. A computer-readable storage medium, storing computer-executable instructions, wherein upon the computer-executable instructions being executed by a processor, a data processing method is implemented;
the data processing method comprises:
the data processing method comprises:
acquiring a target relationship network associated with a first object according to a first operation for the first object, wherein the target relationship network is configured to represent an association relationship between a plurality of objects through a node network relationship;
controlling a plurality of threads to perform a community division on the target relationship network in parallel using locks implemented based on an atomic operation instruction, to obtain a plurality of first node communities, wherein each of the first node communities comprises at least one node in the target relationship network; and
determining the first node community to which the first object belongs according to an association relationship between the first object and objects corresponding to nodes in the target relationship network.
With respect to the computer-readable storage medium storing computer-executable instruction and the processor to execute the computer-executable instructions to cause a data processing method to be implemented, these are highly generic elements that are executing instructions to perform tasks / operations which invokes a computer or other machinery merely as a tool for performing an existing process. With respect to the first operation for a first object, this is highly generic language as an operation with no specific structure recited that would be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of just having an instruction used to implement the method by retrieving information. Similarly, with respect to the plurality of threads in parallel and using locks implemented based on atomic operation instruction, these are also highly generic language that does not recite specific structure that would be sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of multiple operations being done at the same time for the purposes of sorting information (for arranging groups / classifications). The usage / executing of instructions to receive data falls under well-understood, routine, and conventional computer functions as recognized in court decisions listed under MPEP 2106.05(d), and executing instructions to perform tasks / operations which invokes a computer or other machinery merely as a tool for performing an existing process is recognized in court decisions listed in MPEP 2106.05(f).
For these reasons, claim 20 does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea of sorting / grouping.
Furthermore, Examiner notes that claim 20 overall only makes a determination, but does not do anything with the determination. The entire method portion of claim 20 does the acquiring step and controlling step to make the plurality of first node communities, then makes a determination to which first node community the first object belongs to but does nothing with such information, i.e. there is no end result or anything done with the determination, so it can be interpreted as having no results done after completing this process, which further emphasizes that this claim is a mental process of sorting / grouping without significantly more than the abstract idea.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Anchuri et al. (US 10,229,223) which teaches receiving a multigraph representing multi-dimensional relationships between objects, dividing the multigraph into smaller components that are used to compute relevance of patterns for each smaller component and outputting the relevant patterns.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-1724. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm EST.
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, Jyoti Mehta can be reached on 571-270-3995. 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.
/MICHAEL SUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2183