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
Argument:
PNG
media_image1.png
86
664
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response:
Claim 2 was not amended
Argument:
PNG
media_image2.png
132
666
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response:
This rejection has been removed based on the amendment.
Argument:
PNG
media_image3.png
140
668
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Response:
The examiner disagrees. An improved way of generating a supply chain network is at best an improvement to an abstract idea. Per MPEP 2106.05(a), this is not an improvement in technology: “Notably, the court did not distinguish between the types of technology when determining the invention improved technology. However, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology. For example, in Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the court determined that the claimed user interface simply provided a trader with more information to facilitate market trades, which improved the business process of market trading but did not improve computers or technology.”
Argument:
PNG
media_image4.png
246
674
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Response:
The examiner disagrees. A human would be capable of reviewing information, understanding relationships and mapping out the relationships w/ pen and paper. This is an abstract idea. Further see PTAB Decision 2002-004444 which similarly determines and displays a supply chain use graphs. An abstract idea can not provide a practical application and/or significantly more.
A displaying of a result is well understood as extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
Argument:
PNG
media_image5.png
194
664
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Response:
Again as previously explained a different way of generating a representation of a supply chain would at best be an improved abstract idea. Per MPEP 2106.05(a) an improved abstract idea is not a technical improvement.
Argument:
PNG
media_image6.png
120
662
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Response:
The examiner disagrees. MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) states:
The use of a physical aid (e.g., pencil and paper or a slide rule) to help perform a mental step (e.g., a mathematical calculation) does not negate the mental nature of the limitation, but simply accounts for variations in memory capacity from one person to another. For instance, in CyberSource, the court determined that the step of “constructing a map of credit card numbers” was a limitation that was able to be performed “by writing down a list of credit card transactions made from a particular IP address.” In making this determination, the court looked to the specification, which explained that the claimed map was nothing more than a listing of several (e.g., four) credit card transactions. The court concluded that this step was able to be performed mentally with a pen and paper, and therefore, it qualified as a mental process. 654 F.3d at 1372-73, 99 USPQ2d at 1695. See also Flook, 437 U.S. at 586, 198 USPQ at 196 (claimed “computations can be made by pencil and paper calculations”); University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. v. General Electric Co., 916 F.3d 1363, 1367, 129 USPQ2d 1409, 1411-12 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (relying on specification’s description of the claimed analysis and manipulation of data as being performed mentally “‘using pen and paper methodologies, such as flowsheets and patient charts’”); Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1318, 120 USPQ2d at 1360 (although claimed as computer-implemented, steps of screening messages can be “performed by a human, mentally or with pen and paper”).
MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) also states:
In contrast, claims do recite a mental process when they contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. Examples of claims that recite mental processes include:
• a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016);
Similar to the first citation the instant claims also analyze transactions to create a mapping. Similar to the second citation the instant claims also analyze collected information and show a result.
There is nothing in the claims that requires a large amount of data to be processed or provides a specific solution to processing large volumes of data in an unexpected way. There is nothing in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) that relates the volume of calculations to being to the practicality of performing calculations in a human mind. Rather, MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) seems to relate practicality to the nature of the calculations themselves.
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 1-7, 9-21are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1-7, 9-21 recite subject matter falling within one of the four categories of invention (Step 1).
Claims 1-7, 9-21 recite:
[Claim 1] A supply chain network creation apparatus, comprising: a bill of materials creation unit that creates a bill of materials based on a transaction history including information on an order-placing company, an order-accepting company, and items traded between the order-placing company and the order-accepting company; and a supply chain network creation unit that creates a supply chain network representing a transaction relationship between the order-placing company and the order-accepting company based on the bill of materials; and a display unit that displays the supply chain network created by the supply chain network creation unit, wherein the supply chain network is displayed with the order-placing company as a parent node, the order-accepting company as a child node, and the transaction relationship as an arc, thereby enabling a user to visualize a transaction relationships for a target item, and wherein the supply chain network creation unit creates the supply chain network by deleting companies not included in the bill of materials.
[Claim 2] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the bill of materials creation unit creates the bill of materials for items procured commonly by the order-placing company from the order-accepting company based on the transaction history.
[Claim 3] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 2, further comprising: an item categorization unit that, based on an item classification table in which items are defined in two or more classification tiers, estimates tiers in the item classification table and classifications for each tier for items being traded from the transaction history, wherein the bill of materials creation unit creates the bill of materials based on classification items estimated by the item categorization unit.
[Claim 4] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the item categorization unit determines a similarity between an item name of a first tier, which is a most detailed tier in the item classification table, and an item being traded, and classifies the item being traded under an item name of a second tier, which contains a largest number of similar items of the first tier and which is one level above the first tier.
[Claim 5] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the item categorization unit, when there is no item that is similar to the first tier, classifies the item being traded by successively increasing the tier.
[Claim 6] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the supply chain network creation unit creates supply chain network information representing a relationship among the order-placing company, the order-accepting company, and the items handled by the order-accepting company based on the transaction history, and creates the supply chain network based on the supply chain network information.
[Claim 7] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the supply chain network creation unit creates the supply chain network information in addition to transaction relationship information including buyer companies and supplier companies.
[Claim 9] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the supply chain network creation unit creates the supply chain network by deleting companies not included in the bill of materials for each tier when considering the tier relationship of the order-placing company and the order-accepting company.
[Claim 10] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the display unit displays a company name and an item name corresponding to each node near that node when displaying the supply chain network.
[Claim 11] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the supply chain network creation unit creates the display information by changing a method of displaying at least one of either the arc or the node depending on at least one of either accuracy of the transaction relationship or newness at a time when the transaction history was created.
[Claim 12] The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the bill of materials creation unit creates a character string inquiring about materials to be used in producing the item, and creates the bill of materials using generative AI or a search engine based on the character string.
[Claim 13] A supply chain network creation method, wherein a processor executes a program recorded in a memory to: create a bill of materials based on a transaction history including information on an order-placing company, an order-accepting company, and items traded between the order-placing company and the order-accepting company; and create a supply chain network representing a transaction relationship between the order-placing company and the order-accepting company based on the bill of materials; and displaying the supply chain network on a display unit, wherein the supply chain network is displayed with the order-placing company as a parent node, the order-accepting company as a child node, and the transaction relationship as an arc, thereby enabling a user to visualize transaction relationships for a target item, and wherein creating the supply chain network comprises deleting companies not included in the bill of materials.
[Claim 14] A non-transitory CRM storing a program that causes a computer to realize: a function of creating a bill of materials based on a transaction history including information on an order-placing company, an order-accepting company, and items traded between the order-placing company and the order-accepting company; and a function of creating a supply chain network representing a transaction relationship between the order-placing company and the order-accepting company based on the bill of materials; and a function of displaying the supply chain network on a display unit, wherein the supply chain network is displayed with the order-placing company as a parent node, the order-accepting company as a child node, and the transaction relationship as an arc, thereby enabling a user to visualize transaction relationships for a target item, and wherein the function of creating the supply chain network comprises deleting companies not included in the bill of materials.
15. (New) The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: an item categorization unit that calculates a similarity between a classification name and an item name using at least one of a Levenshtein distance or a Jaro-Winkler distance.
16. (New) The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the supply chain network creation unit creates the supply chain network by deleting companies not included in the bill of materials for each tier when considering a tier relationship of the order- placing company and the order-accepting company, thereby reducing time and memory required for company group extraction processing.
17. (New) The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the display unit displays the supply chain network using different line types including at least one of a solid line, a broken line, or a dotted line to indicate accuracy of a transaction relationship.
18. (New) The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a storage unit that stores supply chain network information including parent companies, child companies, child items, product codes of child items, and accuracy and freshness of the network.
19. (New) The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: an item categorization unit that classifies items based on product code information using a tiered classification system in which items are classified into large classification, middle classification, small classification, and fine classification based on serial numbers of a product code.
20. (New) The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: an input unit that receives a processing command including a company name and an item for which the supply chain network is to be created.
21. (New) The supply chain network creation apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the display unit displays the supply chain network with a visual indicator representing freshness, wherein the freshness is calculated based on a period from a delivery date stored in supply chain network information to a time that processing is executed.
Claims 1-7, 9-21 but for the recitation of the underlined additional elements, claims 1-7, 9-21 recite steps that can be performed mentally. Specifically the claims recite steps whereby transaction history is analyzed and used to create bill of material information and supply chain network information. A person is mentally capable of performing the claimed analysis and identifying bills of material and supply chain relationships.
Thus claims 1-7 and 9-21 recite a mental process (Step 2A_1).
The recited additional elements include:
1) Computer-related implementation
A) supply chain network creation apparatus (Claim 1+)
B) various units (Claim 1+)
C) Processor, program, memory (Claim 13, 14).
2) Use of generative AI or search engine (Claim 12)
3) display unit
4) input unit
The elements related to a computer-related implementation are recited at a high degree of generality such that they amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea which per MPEP 2106.05(f) means they do not provide a practical application or significantly more.
Regarding the use of generative AI and/or search engines, these limitations amount to extra-solution activity because they perform necessary data gathering/output, which per MPEP 2106.05(g) means they do not provide a practical application or significantly more. They additionally do not provide significantly more because search engines and generative AI are conventional technologies (see Hu US 20250111162 A1 paragraph 12).
The use of a display unit amount to data output, which per MPEP 2106.05(g) would be considered extra-solution activity that does not provide a practical application or significantly more. Furthermore, a display unit does not provide significantly more because display of information is well-understood routine and conventional. See MPEP 2106.05(d) citing OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
The use of an input unit amounts to data gathering, which per MPEP 2106.05(g) would be considered extra-solution activity that does not provide a practical application or significantly more. Furthermore, an input unit does not provide significantly more because gathering data is well-understood routine and conventional. See MPEP 2106.05(d) citing OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Per the above the additional elements do not provide a practical application or significantly more (Step 2A_2 and Step 2B) and claims 1-7, 9-21 are ineligible.
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 2-5 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. Claim 2 uses the term “commonly” which is a term of degree that renders the claim indefinite. See MPEP 2173.05(b). Claims 3-5 are indefinite based on depending from claim 2.
Prior Art Status
Claims 1-7, 9-21 are considered to distinguish over the cited art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. LI (CN 115760280 A) discloses a system for determination supply chain information. Hertz (US 20180082183 A1) discloses a system to identify supply chain relationships. Yuan (US 20150178645 A1) discloses a system to identify business relationships.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN A MITCHELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3117. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Ryan Zeender can be reached at 571-272-6790. 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.
/NATHAN A MITCHELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights