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 .
Notice to Applicants
This communication is in response to the application filed on 12/18/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 an abstract idea without significantly more. All of the claims are method claims (1-16), apparatus/machine claims (17-20) or manufacture claim (NA) under (Step 1), but under Step 2A prong 1 all of these claims recite abstract ideas and specifically mental processes—concepts performed in the human mind including observation/obtaining, evaluation/analyzation, judgement/identification, and generation of a document which are generally described as a human visually observing an animal to judge the identity of the animal based on known animal data and to generate a certificate related to the animal; furthermore these mental processes are more particularly with method claim 1 used as an example:
Recited in claim 1 as:
Generating a certificate for an animal…
Obtaining from at least one sensor animal data based on the animal related input…
Obtaining from an animal database animal data…
Analyzing by one or more processors, the obtained input and animal data to determine animal identity…
Generating with the one or more processors a certificate including an indicator based on animal data.
It is noted that the above analysis is according to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance published in the Federal Register (84 FR 50) on January 7, 2019 and MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III).
Consider also that “If a claim recites a limitation that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper, the limitation falls within the mental processes grouping, and the claim recites an abstract idea” as per MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(B). See also footnotes 14 and 15 of the Federal Register Notice. As detailed above, the steps of content generating, recognizing, detecting, etc. may be practically performed in the human mind with the use of a physical aid such as a pen and paper and generic computing device. The claims are directed to the mental process of taking a picture of an animal which can be done with a generic computing component such as an image sensor and based on the image comparing it to images from a database or from images remembered in the users mind. The user is a person of reasonable skill in the art and in this case would represent an animal biologist/veterinary worker, the user after obtaining input images would compare those images to images, they know or from a digital database accessed via the generic computer. The two images are then compared/analyzed within the users mind where they identify the animal and the generate a document/certificate using the generic computing system and a word processing program installed on the computer. There are no additional elements for claim 1 as all limitations included in claim 1 represent mental processes.
Under step 2A, prong 2, the claim does not recite any additional elements in order to integrate the judicial exception introduced in the independent claims 1, 11, and 17 as previously stated in prong 1 above, there are no additional elements for claim 1. The claims fail to recite or integrate an additional element and taking independent claims 11 and 17 as an example merely recites the words “for verifying” which are interpreted to mean substantially “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception. Further the abstract idea fails to make an improvement to the claimed generic computing system in claims 1, 11 and 17 and as such fails to integrate a judicial exception to the claims under step 2A prong 2, taking claim 17 as the example:
A) “an electronic device”, “at least one sensor”, “a memory to store executable instructions”, “one or more processors to implement stored instructions”. Which all comprise computer program products ran on a generic computing device described in claim 17 and not adding significantly more to the claims.
B) “a camera” as recited in claim 18 and comprises a generic computing component that does not provide significantly more.
C) “a remote animal database” as recited in claim 19 and comprises a generic computing component that does not provide significantly more.
D) “utilizing artificial intelligence to determine identity of the animal” as recited in claim 20 and this step would be easily performed in the human mind of one skilled in the art of animal identification such as a biologist or a veterinarian.
Under step 2A prong 2, the above identified generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The examiner maintains all of these steps comprise mental process steps which have not been integrated into significantly more by structural/additional claimed elements.
Under Step 2B, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because each of claims 1-20 do not recite additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application. The only additional elements {a generic computing system (claim 17) computing system comprising a computer processor and memory component and a image sensor is a generic computing system and is recited at a high level of generality and merely equate to previously mentioned “to execute”/“apply it” or otherwise merely uses a generic computer and generic computing components as a tool to perform an abstract idea/mental process which are not indicative of integration into a practical application as per MPEP 2106.05(f). The corresponding dependent claims further fail to introduce significantly more to the claims and only include the generic computing components introduced and discussed in the independent claims. See also MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III) with respect to Mental Processes: “Nor do the courts distinguish between claims that recite mental processes performed by humans and claims that recite mental processes performed on a computer”. See also MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(C)(3) Using a computer as tool to perform a mental process and MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(D) as well as the case law cited therein. Further, the depending claims do not remedy these deficiencies:
- claims 2-10, 14-16, 18-20 further recite mental processes which could be performed in the human mind with pen and paper and a generic computing system.
- claims 12-13 represent post solution activity of fact checking/verification and outputting a PDF file using a computer respectively.
In other words, the additional elements and/or are recited at a high level of generality that does not amount to significantly more and/ such that they could practically be performed in the human mind. For all of the above reasons, taken alone or in combination, claims 1-20 recite a non-statutory mental process.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 § U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2012/0265702 A1 to MAHER (hereinafter “MAHER”).
As per claim 1, MAHER discloses a method for generating a certificate for an animal comprising (a computing system and method for inputting data and generating a certificate based on said data; abstract; figs 1-4; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0072]): obtaining, from at least one sensor, an animal related input of the animal (capturing using the image sensors of the system which are cameras images of the animal and using them as input to the system; abstract; figs 1-4; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0072]); obtaining, from an animal database, animal data based on the animal related input (the algorithm/identification model receives the image inputs of the animal and obtains historical animal data/information associated with that animal; abstract; figs 1-4, 6; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0075]); analyzing by one or more processors, the obtained animal related input and animal data to determine an identity of the animal (the computing system using the algorithm trained on identification rules/regulations is based on the image input able to identify the animal and provide the name of the animal type/species; paragraphs [0073-0078]); obtaining, by the one or more processors, additional animal data based on the identity of the animal (the computing system determines and displays the type/name of the animal and other associated data such as vet records; paragraphs [0073-0078]); and automatically generating, with the one or more processors, a certificate that includes an indicator based on the additional animal data (the computing system is adapted to generate an animal certificate containing vet information and other animal data which may be displayed or printed as an output; paragraphs [0078-0079]).
As per claim 2, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one sensor is a camera (the sensor is a camera; paragraphs [0101]).
As per claim 3, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the animal data includes communicating with a remote animal database at a different location than the one or more processors (the computing system is adapted to communicate with historical animal information databases via an internet connection; fig 2; paragraphs [0036], [0047-0052]).
As per claim 4, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein analyzing by the one or more processors, the obtained animal related input and the animal data includes utilizing artificial intelligence to determine the identity of the animal (a trainable algorithm trained on rules and regulations is the model which determines animal identity; paragraphs [0048-0051]).
As per claim 5, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein analyzing by the one or more processors, the obtained animal related input and the animal data includes comparing an image obtained by the at least one sensor to a prior image obtained from the animal database (the computing system is adapted to compare the camera captured animal image with animal images from a database accessed by the computer over the internet connection; fig 5; paragraphs [0067-0070]).
As per claim 6, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the indicator is a QR code (the indicator is a QR/bar code which may be scanned to pull up the certificate/related animal data to the animal imaged using the sensor; paragraph [0068]).
As per claim 7, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein automatically generating the certificate includes printing the certificate with the indicator (the certificate is able to be output digitally over a user interface and display as well as printed an includes the bar code/QR code; fig 8; paragraphs [0069], [0094]).
As per claim 8, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the indicator includes the additional animal data embedded therein (the bar code/QR code includes data such that when scanned it pulls up further data and records on the animal the certificate is generated for; paragraphs [0069], [0094]).
As per claim 9, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the additional animal data includes at least one of health records, vaccine records, or transportation records (the animal data includes veterinary health records; paragraphs [0069], [0088], [0094]).
As per claim 10, MAHER discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the animal is at least one of a dog, cat, equine, bovine, or swine (the animal may be of any species and mentions dog or cat in the paragraphs cited; paragraph [0040]).
As per claim 11, MAHER discloses a method for verifying information related to an animal comprising (a computing system and method for inputting data, verifying the data and generating a certificate based on said data; abstract; figs 1-4; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0072]): obtaining, with one or more processors, third-party animal data related to an animal (); obtaining, from at least one sensor, an animal related input of the animal (capturing using the image sensors of the system which are cameras images of the animal and using them as input to the system; abstract; figs 1-4; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0072]); obtaining, from an animal database, animal data based on the animal related input (the algorithm/identification model receives the image inputs of the animal and obtains historical animal data/information associated with that animal; abstract; figs 1-4, 6; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0075]); analyzing by one or more processors, the obtained animal related input and animal data to determine an identity of the animal (the computing system using the algorithm trained on identification rules/regulations is based on the image input able to identify the animal and provide the name of the animal type/species; paragraphs [0073-0078]); verifying the third-party animal data based on the analyzing (the computing system is adapted to verify the historical/third party data; paragraph [0043]); and automatically generating, with the one or more processors, a prompt to communicate to a user whether the animal is verified (the computing system is adapted to generate an animal certificate containing vet information and other animal data which may be displayed or printed as an output; paragraphs [0078-0079]).
As per claim 12, MAHER discloses the method of claim 11, wherein analyzing the obtained animal related input and animal data to determine the identity of the animal includes determining a remote electronic device with a remote animal database based on the animal related input and animal data (the computing system is adapted to communicate with historical animal information databases via an internet connection; fig 2; paragraphs [0036], [0047-0052]); selecting a format for providing the animal related input and the animal data (certificate producer 216 generates certificate 166 as a file in Adobe PDF format and sends the file to one or both of owner 148 and veterinarian 144, certificate producer 216 generates certificate 166 in HTML format for displaying on a web page generated by web interface 104, for example, the certificate producer 216 generates a representation of certificate 166 in any format requested by owner 148, veterinarian 144 and state officials 134, 190; paragraph [0051]); and converting a file into the format selected prior to communicating the file to the remote electronic device (and the system is adapted to convert the certificate to the format desired and send it over the internet communication network to the user; paragraphs [0051-0051]).
As per claim 13, MAHER discloses the method of claim 12, wherein analyzing the obtained animal related input and animal data to determine the identity of the animal also includes receiving a verification communication from the remote electronic device (the computing system is adapted to verify the historical/third party data and receives a verification alert once completed; paragraph [0043]).
As per claim 14, MAHER discloses the method of claim 11, wherein analyzing by the one or more processors, the obtained animal related input and the animal data includes utilizing artificial intelligence to determine the identity of the animal (a trainable algorithm trained on rules and regulations is the model which determines animal identity; paragraphs [0048-0051]).
As per claim 15, MAHER discloses the method of claim 11, wherein analyzing by the one or more processors, the obtained animal related input and the animal data includes comparing an image obtained by the at least one sensor to a prior image obtained from the animal database (the computing system is adapted to compare the camera captured animal image with animal images from a database accessed by the computer over the internet connection; fig 5; paragraphs [0067-0070]).
As per claim 16, MAHER discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the animal is at least one of a dog, cat, equine, bovine, or swine (the animal may be of any species and mentions dog or cat in the paragraphs cited; paragraph [0040]).
As per claim 17, MAHER discloses an electronic device for generating a certificate for an animal comprising (a computing system and method for inputting data and generating a certificate based on said data; abstract; figs 1-4; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0072]): at least one sensor configured to obtain an animal related input of the animal (capturing using the image sensors of the system which are cameras images of the animal and using them as input to the system; abstract; figs 1-4; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0072]); a memory to store executable instructions and one or more processors, when implementing the executable instructions (the computing system comprises a computer processor component and a memory component to store and execute data, programs, and instructions related to the computing method of operation; figs 1-2; paragraph [0047]), to: obtain, from an animal database, animal data based on the animal related input (the algorithm/identification model receives the image inputs of the animal and obtains historical animal data/information associated with that animal; abstract; figs 1-4, 6; paragraphs [0024-0029], [0070-0075]); analyze the obtained animal related input and animal data to determine an identity of the animal (the computing system using the algorithm trained on identification rules/regulations is based on the image input able to identify the animal and provide the name of the animal type/species; paragraphs [0073-0078]); obtain additional animal data based on the identity of the animal (the computing system determines and displays the type/name of the animal and other associated data such as vet records; paragraphs [0073-0078]); and automatically generate a certificate that includes an indicator based on the additional animal data (the computing system is adapted to generate an animal certificate containing vet information and other animal data which may be displayed or printed as an output; paragraphs [0078-0079]).
As per claim 18, MAHER discloses the electronic device of claim 17, wherein the at least one sensor is a camera (the sensor is a camera; paragraphs [0101]).
As per claim 19, MAHER discloses the electronic device of claim 17, wherein to obtain the animal data includes communicating with a remote animal database at a different location than the one or more processors (the computing system is adapted to communicate with historical animal information databases via an internet connection; fig 2; paragraphs [0036], [0047-0052]).
As per claim 20, MAHER discloses the electronic device of claim 17, wherein to analyze the obtained animal related input and the animal data includes utilizing artificial intelligence to determine the identity of the animal (a trainable algorithm trained on rules and regulations is the model which determines animal identity; paragraphs [0048-0051]).
Conclusion
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited figures, and paragraphs in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested for the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Examiner has also cited references in PTO892 but not relied on, which are relevant and pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure, and may also be reading (anticipatory/obvious) on the claims and claimed limitations. Applicant is advised to consider the references in preparing the response/amendments in-order to expedite the prosecution.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. These prior arts include the following:
US 2007/0033216 A1
US 6,081,607 A
US 2008/0314325 A1
US 2005/0258967 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVIN JACOB DHOOGE whose telephone number is (571) 270-0999. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00.
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, Andrew Bee can be reached on (571) 270-5183. 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.
/D J DHOOGE/Examiner, Art Unit 2677
Prosecution Insights