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
Claim Objection
Claims 9 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: The feature of “paring the first entity profile” should be --pairing the first entity profile--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter 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. Claims 1 and 11 are directed to an abstract idea under organizing human activity and mental processes.
Re claim 1, an apparatus for the generation of dynamic data packets, wherein the apparatus comprises: at least a processor; and a memory communicatively connected to the at least a processor, wherein the memory containing instructions configuring the at least a processor to: receive a plurality of entity profiles comprising a plurality of attribute data; identify target data for each entity profile of the plurality of entity profiles as function of the plurality of attribute data; pair a first entity profile and a second entity profile of the plurality of entity profiles as a function of the target data; assign two or more tools to the first entity profile and the second entity profile as a function of the target data; generate a first dynamic data packet as function of the pairing of the first entity profile and the second entity profile; assign the first dynamic data packet to a first event handler; and update the first dynamic data packet using feedback from the first event handler.
Under Prong I step 2A, the italic limitations “receiving entity profiles, identifying target data, paring profiles, and assigning tools” and routing accordingly is drawn to mental processes and organizing human activity. The pairing of profiles and assigning of tools based on attributed data are fundamental concepts of organizing data and managing interaction which are longstanding commercial and social practices. Identifying and matching entities based on target data which can be performed by a human mind or with pen and paper.
Under Prong II step 2A, the other non-italic limitations in the claims including “a processor…” a memory…”, “generate….profile”, “assign …event handler”, “update… event handler”. The limitations of generating, assigning, and updating merely recite a tool use to automate the abstract process of data organization. The limitations of memory and processor merely recited high level of generalized and generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea. Thus, the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Under step 2B, these additional elements are identified as insignificantly amount to the judicial exception wherein these additional elements are merely recite a tool use to automate the abstract process of data organization and high level of generalized and generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d). Therefore, none of the additional elements recite an inventive concept, thus, the claimed invention is patent ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Re claims 2-10 and 12-20, similarly these claims are recite additional elements; however, these additional elements that are insufficient to amount to the judicial exception wherein these additional elements are merely insignificant extra solution activity such as generate, assign, and update which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and high level of generalized and generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(d). Therefore, none of the additional elements recite an inventive concept, thus, the claimed invention is patent ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No 12/120,000. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,120,000 contains every element of claims 1-20 of the instant application and thus anticipated the claims of the instant application. Claim of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the earlier patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. A later patent/application claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier claim if the later claim is anticipated by the earlier claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-11829513-B2
US-20070094493-A1
US-20240195699-A1
US-20240187348-A1
US-20210314238-A1
US-20200244605-A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUOC H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 am -3:30 pm.
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, Christopher Parry can be reached at 571-272-8328. 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.
/PHUOC H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2451