Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
This responds to Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed 11/5/2025. Claim 16 have been newly added. Claims 1-16 are now pending in this Application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Applicant argues that “the claims recite an intensive concept that transforms the claimed subject matter into a patent-eligible subject matter by improving computer-implemented data management and processing efficiency, i.e., improving the function of the computing system recited (Alice Step 2/MPEP 2106 Step 2B).
In response to Applicant argument the examiner submits that “the use of microprocessor-based device to compare and process information as mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer components to perform routine function. The claim is directed to the abstract idea of managing data records based on expiration time, which is a fundamental data processing concept. Therefore, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
The examiner respectfully maintained the rejection.
Claim 16 appears to be directed to an abstract idea without reciting additional limitations that tie it to a practical application or without reciting additional limitations that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. One can mentally generate graph with nodes for spaces in a building as well as assets that are contained within those spaces. Then one can also mentally associate and classify senor readings and generate relationships between spaces, assets and sensors. The additional limitations are receiving data. These additional limitations are mere data gathering which are insignificant extra solution activities under step 2A prong II and well understood routine and conventional under step 2B (For Berkhiemer See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) Versata.)
Step 2A, Prong One: Mathematical Concepts
Independent claim 16 directed to system for self-expiring data content.
The database structure being configured to store a plurality of data records, wherein each data record includes a data portion, and an expiration time portion storing a time-stamp value representing an expiration; Identify a set of data records whose expiration time portion contains a common expiration time; Access the identified set of data records as a single batch from the memory to perform a comparison operation; Execute a single deletion transaction to delete the entire batch of data records. Those are considered data processing concepts not technological inventions by default.
Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B
Uses generic computer component, implements an abstract data-management concept that would constitute use of a generic computer used as tool to implement the abstract idea discussed above.
The step of receiving data associated with a building constitutes an insignificant extra-solution activity in the form of mere data gather, see MPEP 2106.05(g)
i. Performing clinical tests on individuals to obtain input for an equation, In re Grams, 888 F.2d 835, 839-40; 12 USPQ2d 1824, 1827-28 (Fed. Cir. 1989);
Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Accordingly claims 16 are found to be directed to a patent ineligible abstract idea.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/5/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kimbrell does not disclose “a user-created database, configured to store data records, wherein each data record includes a data portion and an expiration time portion”.
In response to Applicant’s argument, the examiner submits that, Kimbrell discloses “ a user may enter a contact name “John Doe and an associated phone number and associated phone number, and mark a temporary flag for the contact denoting the contact is temporary… the cleanup routine executing in the mobile device may prompt the user to enter a time period or date for deletion of the contact. After the specified deletion or expiration time period, the user may be prompted as to confirm whether this contact “john Doe” should be deleted… each contact may be time-stamped upon entry or last access or use. The time-stamp of each contact and use of each contact, may then be monitored to determine if the contact has not been used within the specified idle/non-use time, and a prompt generated asking whether the contact should be deleted” (Par [0023]). Therefore, Kimbrell discloses this limitation.
Applicant argues that Kimbrell does not disclose “wherein, periodically, the system compares the content of the expiration time portion in groups with a common expiration time to one of a present time or time interval and deletes data records wherein the contents of the expiration time portion indicate an expiration time that is before the present time or exceeds the time interval”.
In response applicant’s argument, the examiner submits that Kimbrell discloses “according to another aspect of the present invention, a method for contact expiration management includes setting a deletion check date for contact stored in a mobile device, comparing the deletion check date for each stored contact with a current date, and generating a prompt confirming detection when the deletion check date for a stored contact is the same as the current date (Par [0005]). A current date may be compared with a deletion check date for each contact. The cleanup routine may determine if the current date is the same as a deletion date for any contact and if not, no detections may occur. It a current date is the same as deletion date for a contact. The cleanup routine may generate a prompt to the user whether to delete contact, if the user selects to delete, the contact may be deleted and the process continue. If the user does not select to delete the contact, the cleanup routine may generate a prompt asking the user whether to revise the deletion period for the specific contact, and if the user selects to revise the deletion period the user may enter a new deletion period, the deletion period for the contact maybe revised and stored (par [0033])”. The cleanup routine may determine if the current date is the same as a deletion date for any contact and if not. The system compares each of the records (group of records) to determine if the contact date is the same as a deletion date. Kimbrell discloses this limitation.
Therefore, the examiner respectfully maintained the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8-11, and 13-15 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kimbrell (U.S. Pub No. 2009/0036163 A1), and in view of Zhao (U.S. Pub No. 2010/0223227).
As per claim 1, Kimbrell discloses a system implemented on a microprocessor-based device for supporting self-expiring data content, comprising a user-created database, configured to store data records, wherein each data record includes a data portion and an expiration time portion (Par [0023, 0025] storing file with an expiration date), and wherein, periodically, the system compares the content of the expiration time portion in groups with a common expiration time to one of a present time or time interval and deletes data records wherein the contents of the expiration time portion indicate an expiration time that is before the present time or exceeds the time interval (Par [0033-0034]).
Kimbrell does not explicitly disclose database. However, Zhao discloses database (Par [0011]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the features as disclosed in Zhao into the teaching of Kimrell in order to improve the reliability and consistency of the system (Par [0008]).
As per claim 2, Kimbrell discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the system is configured to permit user selection or change or removal of the contents of the expiration time portion for each record at any time (par [0031]).
As per claim 3, Kimbrell discloses the system of claim 1, wherein each data record further includes an absolute record expiration time (Par [0023]).
As per claim 4, Kimbrell discloses the system of claim 1, wherein each data record further includes a relative record expiration time (Par [0023]).
As per claim 6, Kimbrell discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the system, upon determining that a particular data record's expiration time has been reached, communicates one of a confirmation-to-delete or acknowledgement-of-deletion message, to a user or computer process, to inform that the data record is to be deleted (Par [0023]).
As per claim 8, Kimbrell discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the system is a mobile phone (Par [0005]).
As per claim 9, Kimbrell discloses a method, implemented on a microprocessor-based device, of supporting self-expiring data content, comprising steps of:
providing a user created database, configured to store data records, wherein each data record includes a data portion and an expiration time portion (Par [0023, 0025]); and
periodically comparing, via the microprocessor of the microprocessor-based device, the content of the expiration time portion in groups with a common expiration time to one of a present time or time interval and deletes data records wherein the contents of the expiration time portion indicate with an expiration time that is before the present time or exceeds the time interval (Par [0025, 0029]).
Kimbrell does not explicitly disclose database. However, Zhao discloses database (Par [0011]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the features as disclosed in Zhao into the teaching of Kimbrell in order to improve the reliability and consistency of the system (Par [0008]).
As per claim 10, Kimbrell discloses the method of claim 9, wherein each data record has an absolute record expiration time (Par [0023]).
As per claim 11, Kimbrell discloses the method of claim 9, wherein each data record has a relative record expiration time (Par [0023]).
As per claim 13, Kimbrell discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the method is used within a mobile phone implementation (Par [0005]).
As per claim 14, Kimbrell discloses the method of claim 9, further comprising, upon determining that a particular data record's expiration time has been reached, communicating one of a confirmation-to-delete or acknowledgement-of-deletion message, to a user or computer process, to inform that the data record is to be deleted (Par [0023]).
As per claim 15, Kimbrell discloses the method of claim 9, further comprising the user altering the contents of the expiration time portion (Par [0031]).
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kimbrell (U.S. Pub No. 2009/0036163 A1), and Zhao (U.S. Pub No. 2010/0223227), and further in view of Jung et al (U.S. Pub No. 2005/0155058).
As per claim 5, Kimbrell and Zhao do not explicitly disclose the system of claim 1, wherein if an expiration time is not selected by the user, the system can automatically determine and associate a default expiration time with the data record, prior to storing the data record in the database, or set no expiration time with that particular data record.
However, Jung discloses wherein if an expiration time is not selected by the user, the system can automatically determine and associate a default expiration time with the data record, prior to storing the data record in the database, or set no expiration time with that particular data record (Par [0081]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the features as disclosed in Jung into the teaching of Kimbrell as modified by in order to provide convenience for user.
As per claim 12, Kimbrell and Zhao do not explicitly disclose the method of claim 9, wherein if an expiration date is not specified as part of the data input, the method can automatically determine and associate a default expiration time with the data record, prior to storing the data record in the database, or set no expiration time with that particular data record.
However, Jung discloses wherein if an expiration date is not specified as part of the data input, the method can automatically determine and associate a default expiration time with the data record, prior to storing the data record in the database, or set no expiration time with that particular data record (Par [0081]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the features as disclosed in Jung into the teaching of Kimbrell as modified by Zhao in order to provide convenience for user.
Claim 7 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kimbrell (U.S. Pub No. 2009/0036163 A1), and Zhao (U.S. Pub No. 2010/0223227), and further in view of Tonosaki (U.S. Pub No. 2008/0096536 A1).
As per claim 7, Kimbrell and Zhao do not explicitly disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the system maintains the list of data records and their expiration times as a deletion list of data records to-be-deleted and their expiration times, including that, as the data records to-be-deleted are added to the database, the deletion list is updated accordingly, and over the period of time, the system reviews entries in the deletion list for those data records that are due to be expired, and deletes those data records.
However, Tonosaki discloses wherein the system maintains the list of data records and their expiration times as a deletion list of data records to-be-deleted and their expiration times, including that, as the data records to-be-deleted are added to the database, the deletion list is updated accordingly, and over the period of time, the system reviews entries in the deletion list for those data records that are due to be expired, and deletes those data records (par [0097-0101]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the features as disclosed in Jung into the teaching of Kimbrell as modified by Zhao in order to provide an updating of information directly to users.
Claim 16 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kimbrell (U.S. Pub No. 2009/0036163 A1), and in view of Hatalkar (U.S. Pub No. 2002/0129095 A1) .
As per claim 16, Kimbrell discloses a microprocessor-based device, comprising:
a non-transitory computer-readable memory storing a database structure the database structure being configured to store a plurality of data records, wherein each data record includes a data portion, and an expiration time portion storing a time-stamp value representing an expiration time (par [0023, 0025]); and
a processor, configured to execute instructions stored in the memory, wherein the instructions cause the system to implement a data management logic configured to: Identify a set of data records whose expiration time portion contains a common expiration time (Par [0033-0034]);
when the common expiration time is before the present time or exceeds the time interval (par [0023]).
Kimbrell discloses cleanup routine may determine if the current date is the same as a deletion date for any contact. Kimbrell does not explicitly disclose periodically access the identified set of data records as a single batch from the non-transitory computer-readable memory operations required for the comparison operation, thereby minimizing a number of memory operations required for the comparison; compare the common expiration time of the single batch of data records from the memory when the common expiration time is before the present time or exceeds the time interval; execute a single deletion transaction to delete the entire batch of data record from the memory when the common expiration time is before the present time or exceed the time interval.
However, Hatalkar discloses periodically access the identified set of data records as a single batch from the non-transitory computer-readable memory operations required for the comparison operation, thereby minimizing a number of memory operations required for the comparison; compare the common expiration time of the single batch of data records from the memory when the common expiration time is before the present time or exceeds the time interval (Par [0029-0034]);
execute a single deletion transaction to delete the entire batch of data record from the memory when the common expiration time is before the present time or exceed the time interval (Par [0033-0034] claims 16-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the features as disclosed in Hatalkar into the teaching of Kimbrell as modified by Zhao in order to reduce memory read operation when performing comparison.
Conclusion
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 THU N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Boris Gorney can be reached at 571-272-5626. 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.
February 10, 2026
/THU N NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2154