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 .
Status of the Claims
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.
Step 1
Claims 1-15 are directed to a series of steps, and therefore is a process.
Claims 16-20 is directed to a system with multiple components, and therefore is a machine.
Independent Claims
Step 2A Prong One
The limitation of Claim 1 recites:
A method of selecting … devices for which statuses are to be determined, the determination being for multiple ... devices each capable of having one of multiple statuses, the method comprising:
obtaining, …, client device information that includes a current device exclusion list having a list of a first plurality of ... devices that are to be excluded from …provided to a client, wherein the obtaining of the client device information comprises:
establishing an … connection with …
requesting, via … communication, access to the client device information;
gaining access, in response to the request, to the client device information;
accessing a previous device exclusion list with the previous device exclusion list having a list of a second plurality of ... devices that were excluded from … previously provided to the client;
comparing the current device exclusion list to the previous device exclusion list to identify a third plurality of ... devices that are listed in the current device exclusion list and are not listed in the previous device exclusion list and a fourth plurality of ... devices that are listed in the previous device exclusion list and are not listed in the current device exclusion list;
for each ... device of the third plurality of ... devices:
excluding each ... device from future determinations of the status of the ... device and from …; and
reassigning a current status listed in … to be indicated as a previous status as listed in the … for each ... device; and for each ... device of the fourth plurality of ... devices:
including each ... device in the …; and
reassigning the previous status listed in the … to be indicated as the current status as listed in the … for each ... device.
The limitation of Claim 16 recites:
A system for selecting ... devices for which statuses are to be determined, the determination being for multiple ... devices each capable of having one of multiple statuses, the system comprising:
… having client device information that includes a current device exclusion list having a list of a first plurality of ... devices that are to be excluded from … provided to a client;
a previous device exclusion list having a list of a second plurality of ... devices that were previously excluded from the … previously provided to the client;
…
obtain the current device exclusion list from … by:
establishing an … connection with …;
requesting, …, access to the client device information; and
gaining access, in response to the request, to the client device information;
compare the current device exclusion list to the previous device exclusion list to identify a third plurality of ... devices that are listed in the current device exclusion list and are not listed in the previous device exclusion list and a fourth plurality of ... devices that are listed in the previous device exclusion list and are not listed in the current device exclusion list; and
… within which a current status for each ... device of the third plurality of ... devices as listed in the … is reassigned to be indicated as a previous status and within which the previous status for each ... device of the fourth plurality of ... devices as listed … is reassigned to be indicated as the current status, wherein, for each ... device of the third plurality of ... devices, … is configured to exclude each ... device from future determinations of the status of the ... device and from …, and wherein, for each ... device of the fourth plurality of ... devices, … is configured to include each ... device in future determinations of the status of each ... device and include each ... device in the … .
The claim limitations as drafted, recite a concept, that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, is a certain method of organizing human activity. The limitations are analogous to managing personal behavior or interactions between people (interactions between people), or a commercial or legal interaction (sales activity) such as determining and communicating statuses of devices within an organization and managing exclusion lists. The generic computer implementations (see below) do not change the character of the limitations. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the following additional elements:
Claim 1:
Electronic device
Client distributed server system
One or more servers
Device status database
Electronic connection
Device tracking database
Claim 13:
Electronic device
Client distributed server system
One or more servers
Device status database
Electronic connection
Device tracking database
an exclusion and device existence (EAE) module in electronic communication with the client distributed server system and the previous device exclusion list and including at least one computer processor, the EAE module being configured to:
These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h))
Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B. The additional elements, when considered separately and in combination, do not add significantly more to the exception. They are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible.
Dependent Claims
Dependent claims 2-15 and 17-20 further narrow the same abstract ideas recited in Claims 1 and 13. Therefore, claims 2-15 and 17-20 are directed to an abstract idea for the reasons given above.
Step 2A Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the dependent claims recite the following additional elements:
Claims 3
Storage media
Claims 4
Storage media
Claims 17
Communication module
Claims 18
Storage media
These additional elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Accordingly, the additional elements, when viewed individually and in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Therefore, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements, amount to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The same analysis applies here in 2B. The additional elements, when considered separately and in combination, do not add significantly more to the exception. They are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The claims are ineligible.
Novelty/Non-Obviousness
The closest prior art of record is:
Berg (US20220167490A1)
Ramirez (20240211871A1)
Choi (US20200034857A1)
Vargas (US20220083927A1)
Berg teaches method and apparatus for tracking and monitoring each particular user's compliance to an electrostatic discharge (ESD) policy; ensuring and tracking ESD safety and compliance of each user (via a unique identifier (ID), such as a serial number associated with each user) via electronics that gather information and parameters from the wearable ESD device such as a wrist strap worn by each user at a company's electronics-manufacturing plant or similar facility that indicate whether a functional ESD ground is established and continually maintained between each user and a workstation at which the user is located, wherein an ESD data-collection system monitor at a central location is configured to receive information on a continual or periodic basis as to whether each user is complying with the ESD policy of the company. Berg teaches the present invention provides an electrostatic-discharge (ESD) compliance-monitoring system configured to monitor ESD compliance of a plurality of users at a plurality of work stations that each has a connection to an earth ground, wherein each respective user of the plurality of users is associated with a respective one of a plurality of wearable ESD devices, wherein each respective wearable ESD device has an associated wearable-device identification code, wherein each respective work station of the plurality of work stations is associated with a respective one of a plurality of ESD interface devices, wherein each respective ESD interface device has an associated interface-device identification code, and wherein the ESD-compliance-monitoring system includes: a first ESD system monitor, wherein the first ESD system monitor is configured to receive communications from at least one device of the plurality of wearable ESD devices and the plurality of ESD interface devices, wherein the communications include the identification code associated with a respective one of the plurality of wearable ESD devices and the identification code associated with a respective one of the ESD interface devices to which the respective one of the plurality of wearable ESD devices becomes connected, and wherein the first ESD system monitor is programmed to record connection and disconnection events between the respective ones of the plurality of wearable ESD devices and the respective ones of the ESD interface devices to which the respective ones of the plurality of wearable ESD devices are connected and to record associated timestamps for each of the connection and disconnection events.
While Berg teaches tracking of devices it does not explicitly teach the concepts of the statuses of the devices.
Ramirez teaches methods for managing an inventory and tracking an inventory item thereof using a single SKU are provided. In particular, an inventory item such as a SIM, a device, or a kit including a SIM and a device can be assigned with a single SKU and tracked using the single SKU. The single SKU allows for precisely and conveniently monitoring and tracking the inventory item to obtain a status thereof (such as a location of the inventory item, an inventory status of the inventory item, and a live status of the inventory item when it becomes owned by a customer, etc.). In this way, the inventory item can be tracked throughout the life cycle of the device, before and after it leaves the inventory, and/or for multiple types of vendors. In addition, by using a single SKU, various aspects of the inventory item (e.g., both the device and the SIM/eSIM of a kit) can be monitored and tracked, eliminating the need to maintain separate SKUs for complex inventory items.
While Ramirez teaches the statuses, it does not teach the EAE module and creating various exclusion lists for the devices and their statuses.
Choi teaches the concepts of an exclusion list. Choi teaches calculating the breakout score for the subset of digital assets includes identifying a set of digital assets having an established breakout date within a particular category of digital assets, identify one or more trendsetters for the particular category of digital assets, identify a list of digital assets within the particular category of digital assets downloaded by at least one trendsetter, filter the list of digital assets to exclude digital assets having a cumulative number of downloads above a threshold value, and calculating the breakout score for each digital asset in the subset of digital assets in the filtered list of digital assets by counting a number of trendsetters that have downloaded that digital asset. In some embodiments, trendsetters are identified within each genre of music in a plurality of different music genres. Choi teaches the list of digital assets is filtered to exclude digital assets that are not obscure. Even though a trendsetter has downloaded some particular digital assets within a category or genre, some of those digital assets might already be well-known and are not suitable for being identified as breakout content. In some embodiments, the list of digital assets installed on a trendsetter's client device is filtered to remove digital assets having a cumulative number of downloads that exceeds a threshold value (e.g., 5,000 downloads).
Vargas teaches application system 200 in operable communication with a user device 202 via a network 130. The user device 202 may be a client computing device or an employee/business representative computing device, which is used to access and operate the application system 205. The application system 205 includes a user interface module 208 to provide a plurality of information onto the display of the user device 208. The information contained in a plurality of databases (e.g., user database 212, inventory database 214, and business database 216) can be searched via the search engine 210 and displayed via the user interface module 208. The user database 212 stores user information including contact information, service history, scheduling availability etc. The inventory database 214 stores product inventory information and may be in operable communication with the POS system 220 to process payments from clients. The inventory database may display up-to-date inventory data in real time on the user device 202, such that the employee can accurately predict availability and locations of products needed for a repair. The business database 216 stores business information including business location, contact information, sales data, and the like. However, it also does not teach the limitations as described above.
In conclusion it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the above references to teach all the limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISMAIL A MANEJWALA whose telephone number is (571)272-8904. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Nathan Uber can be reached on 571-270-3923. 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.
/ISMAIL A MANEJWALA/Examiner, Art Unit 3628
Prosecution Insights