ITEM RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON IMAGE FEATURE DATA

DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Interpretation Claims 1-11 are not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because they are all method claims. Claims 12-19 are not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the recitations of “memory storing instructions” and “processor” provide sufficient structure to perform all claimed limitations. Claim 20 is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it is a manufacture claim. 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 1-5, 7-16 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Regarding claim 1 as a presentative claim, the 101 analysis is presented below. Step 1: It is noted that claim 13 recites a method which is a process. Thus, claim 1 is directed to one of statutory categories of invention. Step 2A Prong 1: Limitations “performing image processing to extract image feature data from the query image”, “based on the image feature data, selecting one or more template images that serve as an ideal complementary item”, “comparing image feature data for the one or more template images with one or more image features associated with an image of each of a plurality of available items”, and “based on the comparing, identifying item recommendations of the plurality of available items that closely match the one or more template images” are interpreted as mental steps (i.e., extracting…, selecting…, comparing…, and identifying…are practically performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper) and mathematical calculation (i.e., comparing…). Thus, these limitations fall into the “mental process” grouping of abstract idea and/or “mathematical concept” grouping of abstract idea. Thus, these limitations also fall into the “mental process” grouping of abstract idea. Therefore, claim 1 recites an abstract idea. Step 2A Prong 2: It is noted that claim does include any additional elements “receiving a query image including an item” and “causing presentation of the item recommendation on a device” that are nothing more than data gathering and post-solution activity and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. These additional elements do not amount to an integration of the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, claim is directed to an abstract idea. Step 2B: The additional elements, as pointed out in Step 2A prong 2, are (i)nothing more than data gathering and post-solution activity which are insignificant activity and (ii)recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a conventional computer and do not point to a specific improvement in computer itself. These additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not contribute to an inventive concept and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Therefore, claim is not a patent eligible. Claim 12 recites an apparatus and claim 20 recites a manufacture so each of these claims falls within one of the statutory categories of invention. It is noted that each of these claims recites similar claim limitations called for in the counterpart claim 1. Thus, the advanced statements as applied to claim 1 above are incorporated herein. It is also noted that claim 12 recites addition elements “memory” and “processor” and claim 20 recites additional elements “medium” and “computer”. The additional elements “memory”, “processor”, “medium” and “computer” are recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a conventional computer. The claims do not point to a specific improvement in computer itself. The additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not contribute to an inventive concept. Therefore, claims 12 and 20 are also directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The advanced statements as applied to claims 1, 12 and 20 are incorporated hereinafter. Regarding claims 2-5, 7-11, 13-15 and 17-19, it is noted that each of these claims does not add any additional claim limitations that would make it statutory because the additional claim limitations in each of these claims is interpreted as either mental step or mathematical calculation. Thus, each of these claims is also directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 6 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claims 6 and 16, the cited prior art does not teach or suggest claim limitations “accessing social network data; based on the social network data, determining social network-based rules by quantifying preferences of individuals in a particular social circle; and generating a plurality of template images based on the social network-based rules”. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUY M DANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7389. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 7:00AM to 3:00PM. 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, Amandeep Saini can be reached on 571-272-3382. 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. DMD 6/2026 /DUY M DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667