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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claim(s) 1-19 do not use “means for” (or “step for”) language, or generic placeholders for "means” coupled with functional language without recitation of sufficient structure for carrying out the claimed functions and therefore do not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.[claims 1-19]
Claims 1-19 include various language which renders the claims indefinite:
Limitation
Claims
Description
“each attribute, vide its vector”
1-19
The claims recite wherein each dimension is correlative to a vector, but do not specifically state that each attribute has an associated vector. Thus it is unclear which vector is being referred to in this limitation
“corresponding to a first/second/third/fourth/fifth attribute, corresponding to a first/second/third/fourth/fifth vector”
1-19
It is unclear whether the “corresponding to a first/second/third/fourth/fifth vector limitation is intended to modify the preceding “corresponding to a first/second/third/fourth/fifth attribute” limitation or whether it is intended to modify the “a first/second/third/fourth/fifth dimension” limitation
“having a plurality of second set of blocks”/”from the second set of blocks”
1-19
It is unclear whether the array includes a plurality of second sets of blocks, or whether the array has a plurality of blocks which are referred to collectively as the “second set”. Additionally, if a plurality of second sets are present, it is unclear which one of the plurality of second sets is being referred to by “the second set of blocks”
“basis”
1-19
The claims recite various instances of “basis”, e.g. “aligning the existing products basis the first base truth values. It is unclear what is meant by “basis” in these limitations. While “basis” may be taken to be “based on”, it is noted that the claims additional use this phrase, e.g. “creating a modified n-dimensional array, based on the first n-dimensional array”. Therefore, it is unclear how applicant intends “basis” in these limitations to be read.
“the betweenness”
12-13
The limitation “the betweenness” in claims 12 and 13 lacks proper antecedent basis.
“the first/second n-dimensional array / matrix”
14-18
While the claims recite a first/second n-dimensional array, the claims do not recite a “matrix”. It is unclear whether “the first/second n-dimensional array / matrix” is referring to a different element or whether it is further defining the first/second n-dimensional array to be a matrix.
Additionally, claims 5-11 appear to be sentence fragments which merely describe a first/second dimension or product data items.
For example, “ wherein, a first dimension, of each block, from the first set of blocks, of the first n-dimensional attribute array, corresponding to a first product attribute, having a first product range in terms of first vectors” does not appear to recite any specific limitations for the first dimension and merely describes a first dimension having the described features without adding any additional details.
Similarly, “wherein, each of the product data items being defined, in terms of one or more product attributes, in that, a first product attribute correlative to product formulation; a second product attribute correlative to product price; and a third product attribute correlative to product application” appears to describe a particular product data item without adding additional details.
It is suggested that “corresponding” be amended to “corresponds” and “being” be amended to “is” in these claims to define a specific additional limitations.
Subject Matter Not Taught by the Prior Art
Claims 1-19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.[claims 1-19]
Regarding claims 1-19, the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest a system or method for creating an ever-expanding, self-calibrating, array of one or more types of attributes, comprising:
defining a first n-dimensional attribute array having a plurality of a first set of blocks, each block, from the first set of blocks, having a first type of data item resident, in that,
each of the first set of blocks being defined, in terms of one or more dimensions correlating to a first set of attributes, each dimension correlative to a vector, each attribute, vide its vector, having a scalar range defined by an upper threshold value and a lower threshold value, in that,
a first dimension, of each block, of the n-dimensional attribute array, corresponding to a first attribute, corresponding to a first vector;
a second dimension, of each block, of the n-dimensional attribute array, corresponding to a second attribute, corresponding to a second vector;
a third dimension, of each block, of the n-dimensional attribute array, corresponding to a third attribute, corresponding to a third vector;
each of the first type of data items being defined, in terms of one or more first set of product attributes, the attributes being:
a first fixed product attribute;
a second variable product attribute;
defining a second n-dimensional identity array having a plurality of second set of blocks, each block, from the second set of blocks, having a second type of data item resident, in that,
each of the second set of blocks being defined, in terms of one or more dimensions, correlating to a second set of attributes, each dimension correlative to a vector, each attribute, vide its vector, having a scalar range defined by an upper threshold value and a lower threshold value, in that,
a first dimension, of each block, from the second set of blocks, of the n-dimensional identity array, corresponding to a fourth attribute, corresponding to a fourth vector;
a second dimension, of each block, from the second set of blocks, of the n-dimensional array, corresponding to a fifth attribute, corresponding to a fifth vector;
each of the second type of data items being defined, in terms of one or more second set of user attributes, the attributes being:
a first fixed user attribute;
a second variable user attribute;
determining spatial extrapolation, in terms of strengths of association, between one of the fourth vector and the fifth vector and at least one of the first vector, the second vector, and the third vector in a pre-defined range, the determination leading to a correlation between the first n-dimensional attribute array and the second n-dimensional attribute array;
creating a modified n-dimensional array, based on the first n-dimensional array by polling data from the second n-dimensional array, the modified n-dimensional array being created by:
polling one or more existing products to determine s corresponding first product attribute forming the first vector, second vector, and third vector;
polling one or more product-user-experts, in correlation with one or more products, to determine a corresponding second product attribute forming a fourth vector;
polling one or more product users, in correlation with one or more products, to determine a corresponding third product attribute forming a fifth vector;
fixing a first base truth value, for the variable product attribute, of each of the first set of product attributes, based on the polled first product attribute;
aligning the existing products basis the first base truth values in the first n-dimensional attribute array;
fixing a second base truth value, for the variable product attribute, of each of the second set of product attributes, based on the polled second product attribute;
aligning the existing products basis the second base truth values in the second n-dimensional attribute array;
fixing a third base truth value, for the variable product attribute, of each of the third set of product attributes, based on the polled third product attribute;
aligning the existing products basis the third base truth values in the second n-dimensional attribute array;
inputting a new product with corresponding first product attributes;
receiving first feedback, from product-user-experts, correlative to the second product attribute in order to achieve a first new truth value;
receiving second feedback, from product-user, correlative to the third product attribute in order to achieve a second new truth value; and
interspersing the input new product in the modified n-dimensional attribute array, basis the first new truth value, the second new truth value, the first base truth value, the second base truth value, the third base truth value at an array location such that adjacent truth values are within at least two degrees of separation of the truth values.
While the prior art teaches similar systems/methods for product recommendation (e.g. Ring et al. (US 2022/0027977 A1), Makowsky et al. (US 2021/0248656 A1), Roy Chowdhury et al. (US 2021/0049665 A1), Gunjan et al. (US 2016/0005056 A1), Yu et al. (US 2009/0299996 A1), Baran et al. (US 2008/0215349 A1), MacGreggor (US 2007/0150471 A1)), the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the particular system/method as claimed in claims 1-19.
However, the 35 USC 112(b) rejections above must be overcome before the claims can be considered allowable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J HENN whose telephone number is (571)272-7310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday ~10-6.
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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at (571) 272-7406. 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.
/Timothy J Henn/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639
