DETAILED ACTION
The following is a non-final, first office action in response to the application filed December 2, 2024. Claims 1, 3-13, 15-20, 22, and 26 have been elected. Claims 2, 14, 21, 23-25, and 27-29 have been withdrawn. Claims 1, 3-13, 15-20, 22, and 26 are currently pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Claims 2, 14, 21, 23-25, and 27-29 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on September 2, 2026.
Applicant's election with traverse has been fully considered but is not persuasive. Claim 2 has separate utility such as accept input from the user of at least one of said user's face image or palm image; detect the user's facial feature areas and their placement from the face image and/or detecting the user's palm lines and their placement from the palm image; generate keywords about the user based on said feature portions of said user's face and their arrangement and/or said palm lines of said user and their arrangement. Claim 24 has separate utility such as a step of presenting the keywords to a service site, receiving search results from the service site, and presenting services at the service site to the user based on the search results. Claim 25 has separate utility such as a step of accepting input from the user of at least one of said user's face image or palm image; a step of detecting the user's facial feature areas and their placement from the face image and/or detecting the user's palm lines and their placement from the palm image, The step of generating keywords about the user based on said feature portions of said user's face and their arrangement, and/or said palm lines of said user and their arrangement; and a step of presenting the keywords to a service site, receiving search results from the service site, and presenting services at the service site to the user based on the search results. While claim 1 requires ccept first information input from the user regarding the user's birth information; generate keywords related to the user based on the first information accepted in accepting the input and the second information about the given date and time; and search for a service site using the keywords and presenting services at the service site to the user based on the search results not required by claims 2, 24, and 25. Independent claims 1, 2, 24, and 25 may overlap but require different searches, therefore the restriction is proper.
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.
1. Claims 1, 3-13, 15-20, 22, and 26 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, 3, 7, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1, 22, and 26, the claim recites “the second information about the given date and time.” However, neither “second information” nor “the given date and time” has been previously introduced in the claim. The claim previously recites only “first information input from the user regarding the user's birth information.” Accordingly, it is unclear what information constitutes the recited “second information” and to what date and time “the given date and time” refers.
Dependent claims 3-13 and 15-20 do not act to cure the deficiencies of claims 1, 22, and 26 and 15, and are thereby rejected for at least the same rationale.
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, 3-13, 5-20, 22, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Statutory Category
(MPEP § 2106)
Claims 1-20 are directed towards a method and a system. The claims are directed to a statutory category: a process and a machine, as defined under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Regarding Claim 1:
Step 2A, Prong One: Judicial Exception – Abstract Idea
(MPEP § 2106.04)
Claim 1 recites the following limitations that constitute the abstract idea:
“accept first information input from the user regarding the user's birth information” – recites collecting information concerning a user;
“generate keywords related to the user based on the first information accepted in accepting the input and the second information about the given date and time” – recites analyzing information concerning the user and other information to generate information related to the user; and
“search for a service site using the keywords and presenting services at the service site to the user based on the search results” – recites using the analyzed information to search for and present services to the user.
Taken together, the above limitations recite collecting and analyzing information concerning a user and using the resulting information to identify and present services relevant to the user. This constitutes a certain method of organizing human activity, specifically commercial interactions, including marketing or sales activities or behaviors, because information concerning a user is used to identify and present services to the user.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Integration into a Practical Application
(MPEP § 2106.04(d))
The claim is evaluated to determine whether the judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In addition to the abstract idea identified above, claim 1 recites “processing circuitry” configured to perform the recited functions.
The processing circuitry does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Rather, the processing circuitry is recited at a high level of generality and is used merely as a tool for performing the abstract functions of receiving information, analyzing the information to generate keywords, searching using the keywords, and presenting information based on the search results.
The claim does not recite an improvement to the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field. For example, the claim does not recite a particular improvement to computer processing, data storage, network operation, search technology, or another technological mechanism. Instead, the processing circuitry is invoked to implement the collection, analysis, searching, and presentation of information used to identify services relevant to a user.
Further, the recitation of a “service site” does not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The service site merely provides the environment in which the search is conducted and the resulting services are presented. The claim does not recite a technological improvement in the operation of the service site itself.
The claim also does not apply or use the judicial exception in conjunction with a particular machine that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or otherwise apply the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a computerized environment.
Therefore, the additional element, whether considered individually or in combination with the recited judicial exception, does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: Inventive Concept
(MPEP § 2106.05)
The claim is evaluated to determine whether any additional element, individually or as an ordered combination, amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As discussed above, the additional element of “processing circuitry” is recited at a high level of generality and performs the generic computer functions of receiving and processing information and implementing the recited information analysis, searching, and presentation.
The processing circuitry does not recite a particular unconventional computer component or technological arrangement. Rather, it is used in its ordinary capacity to execute the recited information-processing functions. Thus, the processing circuitry amounts to no more than generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment and using a generic computer component to perform the abstract idea.
Considered as an ordered combination, the limitations similarly amount to using generic processing circuitry to collect user information, analyze that information to generate keywords, use the keywords to search for services, and present services based on the search results. The ordered combination does not add any additional feature that amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Accordingly, the additional element, considered individually and as an ordered combination, does not provide an inventive concept sufficient to transform the claimed abstract idea into a patent-eligible application.
Therefore, the claim is not directed to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Regarding Claims 22 and 26
Independent claims 22 and 26 are parallel in scope to claim 1 and ineligible for similar reasons.
Regarding Claims 3-13 and 15-20
Dependent claims 3-13 and 15-20 merely set forth further embellishments to the abstract idea, and therefore do not confer eligibility on the claimed invention and are ineligible for similar reasons to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 9-13, 15-18, 22, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al (US 2019/0114689 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 22, and 26, Wang discloses An apparatus comprising: processing circuitry configured to:
accept first information input from the user regarding the user's birth information (Wang: paragraph [0058] - In another scenario, if the astrological sign or birth stone, birth animal of the customer is known (e.g., derived from a known birthday, or birth month, or age), the information exchange system predicts how the user is doing at the present time);
generate keywords related to the user based on the first information accepted in accepting the input and the second information about the given date and time; and search for a service site using the keywords and presenting services at the service site to the user based on the search results (Wang: paragraph [0059] - In some embodiments, textual output retrieved from astrological data services are parsed for keywords to identify contexts for finance/wealth, spending vs. saving, elements like air/water/fire/wind, and corresponding product domains and characteristics are activated (like air-conditioner/water cooler/oven/fan) to generate product recommendations).
Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 1. Wang further discloses wherein said keywords are uniquely determined based on said first and second information (Wang: paragraph [0059] - In some embodiments, textual output retrieved from astrological data services are parsed for keywords to identify contexts for finance/wealth, spending vs. saving, elements like air/water/fire/wind, and corresponding product domains and characteristics are activated (like air-conditioner/water cooler/oven/fan) to generate product recommendations).
Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 1. Wang further discloses wherein the birth information necessarily includes information about the user's date of birth and may include information about the user's birth time, location information of the user's birth location, and the user's blood type (Wang: paragraph [0058] - In another scenario, if the astrological sign or birth stone, birth animal of the customer is known (e.g., derived from a known birthday, or birth month, or age), the information exchange system predicts how the user is doing at the present time).
Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 1. Wang further discloses wherein in generating said keywords, a plurality of said keywords are generated (Wang: paragraph [0059] - In some embodiments, textual output retrieved from astrological data services are parsed for keywords to identify contexts for finance/wealth, spending vs. saving, elements like air/water/fire/wind, and corresponding product domains and characteristics are activated (like air-conditioner/water cooler/oven/fan) to generate product recommendations).
Regarding claim 9, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 1. Wang further discloses wherein the service site is an e-commerce site (Wang: abstract - product recommendation).
Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 9. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said service at said service site to said user, said service is presented to said user based on said user's purchase history at said e-commerce site (Wang: Figure 3).
Regarding claim 11, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 10. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said service at said service site to said user, information about products or services sold at said e-commerce site is presented to said user based on said user's past purchase history and said search results using said keywords (Wang: paragraph [0048] - In some embodiments, when existing customers' identities are recognized, their historical preferences, shopping behaviors, historical purchase patterns, customer segmentation, store credits, gift card balance, and coupon or discount information will be pulled out of the databases in real-time and used to generate accurate and high probability product recommendations for each customer based on his unique personas (e.g., customer profile) already recorded, based on the current in-store experience, and/or other third-party public information (e.g., public record regarding social status changes, marital status changes, etc.)).
Regarding claim 12, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 11. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said service at said service site to said user, based on said purchase history at said e-commerce site of users, including said user using said e-commerce site, information regarding said goods or services sold at said e-commerce site is presented (Wang: paragraph [0048] - In some embodiments, when existing customers' identities are recognized, their historical preferences, shopping behaviors, historical purchase patterns, customer segmentation, store credits, gift card balance, and coupon or discount information will be pulled out of the databases in real-time and used to generate accurate and high probability product recommendations for each customer based on his unique personas (e.g., customer profile) already recorded, based on the current in-store experience, and/or other third-party public information (e.g., public record regarding social status changes, marital status changes, etc.)).
Regarding claim 13, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 1. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said services at said service site to said user, presenting information to the user about products or services sold on the e-commerce site based on the user's past purchase history and the search results by the keywords, and moreover, presenting information regarding goods or services sold at said e-commerce site to said user based on said purchase history at said e-commerce site of a user with whom said first information regarding said birth information of said user is common and said search results using said keywords (Wang: paragraph [0048] - In some embodiments, when existing customers' identities are recognized, their historical preferences, shopping behaviors, historical purchase patterns, customer segmentation, store credits, gift card balance, and coupon or discount information will be pulled out of the databases in real-time and used to generate accurate and high probability product recommendations for each customer based on his unique personas (e.g., customer profile) already recorded, based on the current in-store experience, and/or other third-party public information (e.g., public record regarding social status changes, marital status changes, etc.)).
Regarding claim 15, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 9. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said service at said service site to said user, said service is presented to said user without being based on said user's purchase history at said e-commerce site (Wang: paragraph [0058] - In some embodiments, with no existing data or input about a particular customer, recommendations may still be generated for the customer based on the favorable factors for the present day and time in accordance with a predefined belief or fortune-forecasting system).
Regarding claim 16, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 11. Wang further discloses wherein in generating said keywords, a plurality of said keywords are generated and for each of said keywords, a parameter to be used in searching said service site is associated (Wang: paragraph [0008]- a backend information exchange system is used to generate artificial intelligence models, rules, and decision logic, and to derive relevant parameters and effectively integrate those parameters with other relevant data that is made available through computer-based information processing capabilities of the backend information exchange system. Specifically, the backend information exchange system is designed to identify particular data that, when combined with the relevant information and parameters obtained through the in-person close-proximity interactions with the human users, enable previously unavailable decision paths and enhance predictability of user preferences and intent for the particular user in question).
Regarding claim 17, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 16. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said service at said service site to said user, if said user purchases said product or service as a result of presenting information about said product or service to said user, the value of said parameter is increased, and if said user does not purchase said goods or services as a result of said presentation of information regarding said goods or services to said user, said parameter value is decreased (Wang: paragraph [0052] - . In some embodiments, the information exchange system adjusts the parameters and/or changes the selection models to launch a new round of recommendations according to the new information that has been obtained. In some embodiments, a threshold or a set of criteria are set to determine when it is time to cease making additional recommendations (e.g., when the number of rejected recommendations has exceeded a preset number, or when the customer's verbal or facial expression meets a threshold dissatisfaction score, and/or when particular predefined keywords or phrases are spoken by the user, etc.) and to redirect the conversation and alleviate the tension (e.g., asking if the user wishes to speak to a human representative, or if the user wishes to receive a coupon, or see a promotional video, or play a game to win a prize, etc.)).
Regarding claim 18, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 17. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said service at said service site to said user, the time spent at said service site where said product or said service presented to said user is displayed is detected, and the value of said parameter is increased or decreased based on this time spent (Wang: paragraph [0052] - . In some embodiments, the information exchange system adjusts the parameters and/or changes the selection models to launch a new round of recommendations according to the new information that has been obtained. In some embodiments, a threshold or a set of criteria are set to determine when it is time to cease making additional recommendations (e.g., when the number of rejected recommendations has exceeded a preset number, or when the customer's verbal or facial expression meets a threshold dissatisfaction score, and/or when particular predefined keywords or phrases are spoken by the user, etc.) and to redirect the conversation and alleviate the tension (e.g., asking if the user wishes to speak to a human representative, or if the user wishes to receive a coupon, or see a promotional video, or play a game to win a prize, etc.)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6-8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wang et al (US 2019/0114689 A1) in view of Sapugay et al (US 2021/0295413 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 5. Wang does not expressly disclose wherein in generating the keywords, a weight is assigned to each of said keywords.
Sapugay discloses: wherein in generating the keywords, a weight is assigned to each of said keywords (Sapugay: paragraph [0030] - . The recommendation engine may be configured for determining one or more session keywords and related session keyword weights based on the one or more user activity attributes and one or more preset user activity parameters).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method and apparatus of Wang to have included wherein in generating the keywords, a weight is assigned to of said keywords, as taught by Sapugay because it would provide more relevant product recommendations (Sapugay: paragraph [0006]).
Regarding claim 7, Wang and Sapugay teach or suggest all the limitations of claim 6 as noted above. Sapugay further discloses wherein in presenting said services at said service site to said user, said keywords to search for said service site are selected based on said weighting (Sapugay: paragraph [0030] - For example, products may be ranked according to the total weight of the tags related to a product based on the keyword weights present in the topic set.).
Regarding claim 8, Wang and Sapugay teach or suggest all the limitations of claim 6 as noted above. Wang further discloses wherein in presenting said services at said service site to said user, said keywords to search for said service site are selected based on the attributes of said keywords (Wang: paragraph [0059] - In some embodiments, textual output retrieved from astrological data services are parsed for keywords to identify contexts for finance/wealth, spending vs. saving, elements like air/water/fire/wind, and corresponding product domains and characteristics are activated (like air-conditioner/water cooler/oven/fan) to generate product recommendations (e.g., products, product categories, product characteristics, product features, and coupons and promotion deals, etc.)).
Claims 19 and 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wang et al (US 2019/0114689 A1) in view of Emma et al (US 20190156222 A1).
Regarding claim 19, Wang discloses all of the limitations as noted above in claim 1. Wang does not expressly disclose generate an avatar symbolizing said user in the virtual space based on said keywords generated in the step of generating said keywords concerning said user.
Emma discloses: generate an avatar symbolizing said user in the virtual space based on said keywords generated in the step of generating said keywords concerning said user (Emma: paragraph [0043] - Raw data is further analyzed by the AI engine, whereby keywords, phrases, and ideas are extracted and recommendations are prepared. The extracted keywords, phrases, and ideas are stored in the memory and database, wherein each keyword, phrase, or idea is analyzed for relevance to each other and to set categories or customized goals. In another embodiment, connotation(s) of keywords and phrases are extracted, stored, and analyzed. Each element of the extracted data is stored with a link to a corresponding user profile such that the raw data is relevant to a specific user. Upon categorizing and tagging the extracted elements, the AI utilizes NLP to derive a meaning from each word, phrase, or idea and update a personality of a user profile).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method and apparatus of Wang to have included generate an avatar symbolizing said user in the virtual space based on said keywords generated in the step of generating said keywords concerning said user, as taught by Emma because it would provide less mechanical responses (Emma: paragraph [0003]).
Regarding claim 20, Wang and Emma teach or suggest all the limitations of claim 19 as noted above. Emma further discloses wherein in generating the avatar in the virtual space, at least one of the behavior pattern and personality of the avatar is set based on the keywords. (Emma: paragraph [0043] - Raw data is further analyzed by the AI engine, whereby keywords, phrases, and ideas are extracted and recommendations are prepared. The extracted keywords, phrases, and ideas are stored in the memory and database, wherein each keyword, phrase, or idea is analyzed for relevance to each other and to set categories or customized goals. In another embodiment, connotation(s) of keywords and phrases are extracted, stored, and analyzed. Each element of the extracted data is stored with a link to a corresponding user profile such that the raw data is relevant to a specific user. Upon categorizing and tagging the extracted elements, the AI utilizes NLP to derive a meaning from each word, phrase, or idea and update a personality of a user profile).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2021/0248446 A1, Hughes et al discloses METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING PRODUCT SIMILARITY IN DIGITAL DOMAINS.
PTO-892 Reference U discloses Understanding Fortunetelling with Large Language Models in China: User Practices, Perceptions, and Impacts on Beliefs and Decisions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN G PALAVECINO whose telephone number is (571)270-1355. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at (571) 272-6764. 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.
KATHLEEN GAGE PALAVECINO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3688
/KATHLEEN PALAVECINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3688
