DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is a non-final, first office action in response to the application filed 2 March 2025.
Claims 1-8 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a shipping data acquisition unit, a nine-intersection model constructing unit, and a consolidation plan determining unit, in claim 6. With respect to these elements, the Examiner is interpreting the corresponding hardware that preforms these claimed units is the processor and memory, as disclosed in paragraphs 22, 215, and 221-224.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 6-8 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation, “the method that determining a consolidation plan” in line 19 of the claim. In this case, the Applicant has failed to previously define or introduce “a method for determining a consolidation plan,” and as such, this claim is indefinite and unclear for failing to particularly define the invention, as it is unclear as to what “method” this recitation is referring to. For the purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to read, “a method for determining a consolidation plan for shipping data based on the shipping schedule…."
With respect to claim 7, the Applicant claims, “A computer equipment, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is configured to store a program, the processor is coupled with the memory and is configured to execute the program stored in the memory to implement the steps of the cargo transportation method according to claim 1.” The Applicant has rendered this claim indefinite and unclear for failing to particularly define the claimed invention. In this case, the Examiner notes that the Applicant has recited claim 7 as a mixture between an independent claim and a dependent claim. Notably, the Applicant has stated that the statutory class of claim 7 is “an equipment,” which is presumed to be an “apparatus;” however, the Applicant refers to the claim as implanting a method, and specifically, “the steps of the cargo transportation method according to claim 1.” It remains unclear if the Applicant is attempting to claim an independent claim, in which case this claim would be improper for claiming a separate claim as dependency, or attempting to claim a dependent claim, in which the case the claim would be unclear as it would have two statutory classes. For the purpose of examination, and for future clarity sake that the Examiner recommends, the Examiner will interpret the claim to be an independent claim, and instead of reciting “the method for water transportation consolidation as claimed in claim 1,” the actual steps of claim 1 would be recited.
With respect to claim 8, the Applicant claims, “A computer-readable storage medium, comprising a program or instruction stored therein, wherein the program or the instruction is readable by a computer equipment, and the program or the instruction is executed by a processor of the computer equipment to implement the steps of the cargo transportation method according to claim 1.” The Applicant has rendered this claim indefinite and unclear for failing to particularly define the claimed invention. In this case, the Examiner notes that the Applicant has recited claim 8 as a mixture between an independent claim and a dependent claim. Notably, the Applicant has stated that the statutory class of claim 8 is “a computer-readable storage medium,” which is presumed to be an “article of manufacture;” however, the Applicant refers to the claim as implanting a method, and specifically, “the steps of the cargo transportation method according to claim 1.” It remains unclear if the Applicant is attempting to claim an independent claim, in which case this claim would be improper for claiming a separate claim as dependency, or attempting to claim a dependent claim, in which the case the claim would be unclear as it would have two statutory classes. For the purpose of examination, and for future clarity sake that the Examiner recommends, the Examiner will interpret the claim to be an independent claim, and instead of reciting “the steps of the cargo transportation method according to claim 1,” the actual steps of claim 1 would be recited.
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.
Claim 8 requires a computer readable storage medium, which stores a program. The specification does not set forth what constitutes a computer readable medium, and therefore, in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media and in accordance with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, said medium could be directed towards a transitory propagating signal per se and considered to be non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356 57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. 101, Aug 24, 2009, p. 2. Claims that recite nothing but the physical characteristics of a form of energy, such as a frequency, voltage, or the strength of a magnetic field, define energy or magnetism, per se, and as such are nonstatutory natural phenomena. O'Reilly, 56 U.S. (15 How.) at 112-14. Moreover, it does not appear that a claim reciting a signal encoded with functional descriptive material falls within any of the categories of patentable subject matter set forth in §101.
Claims 1-5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite receiving transport request information, wherein the transport request information at least comprises departure port information and destination port information; obtaining shipping data from different shipping companies, classifying the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtaining shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; wherein the shipping route related data comprises shipping company code, route code, route departure port, route stopping ports, route destination port, departure time at departure port, arrival time at route stopping ports, and destination port arrival time; the ship related data comprises ship identification code, ship cargo type, and ship deadweight; the cargo related data comprises cargo type and cargo capacity; constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data; determining at least two target ships based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data; sending instruction information to the at least two target ships, wherein the instruction information is configured to control the at least two target ships to transport cargo from a departure port to a destination port; the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model comprises nine-intersection model of route and nine-intersection model of time; the step of determining the at least two target ships based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data comprises: determining a first route and a second route based on the transport request information, and determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment for cargo transportation between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route; when there is the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets a time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time; when the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition, determining whether there are goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data; when there are the goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on the ship related data; and when the consolidated shipping segment meets requirements for cargo logistics loading, determining the at least two target ships based on the consolidated shipping segment wherein the nine-intersection model of route; wherein the nine-intersection model of route is a 3x3 matrix; and the nine-intersection model of time is a 3x3 matrix.
The limitations of receiving transport request information, wherein the transport request information at least comprises departure port information and destination port information; obtaining shipping data from different shipping companies, classifying the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtaining shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; wherein the shipping route related data comprises shipping company code, route code, route departure port, route stopping ports, route destination port, departure time at departure port, arrival time at route stopping ports, and destination port arrival time; the ship related data comprises ship identification code, ship cargo type, and ship deadweight; the cargo related data comprises cargo type and cargo capacity; constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data; determining at least two target ships based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data; sending instruction information to the at least two target ships, wherein the instruction information is configured to control the at least two target ships to transport cargo from a departure port to a destination port; the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model comprises nine-intersection model of route and nine-intersection model of time; the step of determining the at least two target ships based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data comprises: determining a first route and a second route based on the transport request information, and determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment for cargo transportation between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route; when there is the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets a time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time; when the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition, determining whether there are goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data; when there are the goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on the ship related data; and when the consolidated shipping segment meets requirements for cargo logistics loading, determining the at least two target ships based on the consolidated shipping segment wherein the nine-intersection model of route; wherein the nine-intersection model of route is a 3x3 matrix; and the nine-intersection model of time is a 3x3 matrix; as drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, encompass a series of steps that could be performed in the human mind, the managing of commercial activity (business relations), the managing interactions and behaviors between people, and the performance of mathematical concepts. That is, other than reciting the use of generic computer elements (computer equipment, electronic devices, memory, processor, computer readable storage medium), the claims recite an abstract idea. In particular, obtaining transport request information, obtaining shipping data from different shipping companies, classifying the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtaining shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; encompass steps that can be performed by the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement). In addition, constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data, determining target ships based on the received information and model, and carrying out consolidation based on the consolidation plan; encompass steps that can be performed by the human mind (evaluation, judgement). In addition, determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time, determining whether there are overlapping goods in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on ship related data, carrying out consolidation in the consolidated shipping segment; encompass steps that can be performed by the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement). As such, the claims recite elements that fall in the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Additionally, receiving transport request information, obtaining shipping data from different shipping companies, classifying the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtaining shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; encompass managing business relations, as this encompasses collecting shipping information for ongoing jobs. In addition, constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data, determining two target ships to transport goods based on the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data, and sending instructions to the ships to send the ships from the departure port to destination port; encompass managing business relations, and relationships between people, as this is merely constructing business plans that carriers can perform. In addition, determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time, determining whether there are overlapping goods in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on ship related data, carrying out consolidation in the consolidated shipping segment; encompass managing business relations, and relationships between people, as this is merely constructing business plans that carriers can perform. As such, the claims recite elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. In addition, the claims recite the creation and use of nine-intersection models for routes and time, which encompasses the performance of mathematical concepts. As such, the claims recite the elements that fall into the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. The claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not recite additional elements, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, that improve the functioning of a computer, another technology, or technical field. The claims do not recite the use of, or apply the abstract idea with, a particular machine, the claims do not recite the transformation of an article from one state or thing into another. Finally, the claims do not recite additional elements, taken individually and in an ordered combination, that apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Instead, the claims recite the use of generic computer elements (computer equipment, electronic devices, memory, processor, computer readable storage medium) as tools used to carry out the abstract idea. In addition, the claims recite controlling target ships via an instruction, which is deemed merely a recitation of “apply it,” and merely the high level use of generic machinery in their ordinary tasks. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using generic computer elements and machines to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are directed to non-patent eligible subject matter.
The dependent claims 2-5, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, do not recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or add significantly more to the abstract idea. In particular, the claims further recite the first route comprises a first departure port and a first destination port, and the second route comprises a second departure port and a second destination port; determining whether the first departure port and second departure port are the same, as well as whether the first destination port and second destination port are the same, and when the first department port and the second department port are the same, and the first destination port and the second destination port are also the same, there is a consolidated shipping segment between the first route and the second route; which further recites elements that can be performed in the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement), managing business relations, and managing personal behavior (managing the construction business plans including consolidation and shipping plans), and as such the claims recite elements that fall into the “Mental Processes” and the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas (claim 2). In addition, the claims further recite determining whether the first departure port and second departure port are the same, and whether the first destination port and the second destination port are the same based on the nine-intersection model of route; which further recites elements that can be performed in the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement), managing business relations, and managing personal behavior (managing the construction business plans including consolidation and shipping plans), and as such the claims recite elements that fall into the “Mental Processes” and the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas (claim 3). In addition, the claims recite various criteria/situations for determining whether there is a consolidated shipment, which encompasses narrowing of the field of use and does not recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or add significantly more to the abstract idea (claim 3). In addition, the claims further recite obtaining the first departure time of the first route at the departure port for consolidated shipment and the first arrival time of the first route at the arrival port for consolidated shipment, obtaining the second departure time of the second route at the departure port for consolidated shipment and the second arrival time of the second route at the arrival port for consolidated shipment, determining whether there is a time intersection between the first departure time and the second departure time, and whether there is a time intersection between the first arrival time and the second arrival time; which further recites elements that can be performed in the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement), managing business relations, and managing personal behavior (managing the construction business plans including consolidation and shipping plans), and as such the claims recite elements that fall into the “Mental Processes” and the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” groupings of abstract ideas (claim 4). In addition, the claims recite various criteria/situations for determining whether there is a consolidated shipment satisfies a time requirement, which encompasses narrowing of the field of use and does not recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or add significantly more to the abstract idea (claim 4). In addition, the claims further recite determining the cargo capacity of the first vessel, the ship deadweight of the first vessel, the cargo capacity of the second vessel, and the ship deadweight of the second vessel based on the ship related data; determining whether the ship deadweight of the first vessel or the ship deadweight of the second vessel is greater than the sum of the cargo capacity of the first vessel and the cargo capacity of the second vessel; which further recites elements that can be performed in the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement), managing business relations, and managing personal behavior (managing the construction business plans including consolidation and shipping plans), and the performance of mathematical calculations (comparing values), and as such the claims recite elements that fall into the “Mental Processes,” “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity,” and “Mathematical Concepts” groupings of abstract ideas (claim 5). In addition, the claims recite various criteria/situations for determining whether there is a consolidated shipment, which encompasses narrowing of the field of use and does not recite additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or add significantly more to the abstract idea (claim 5).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a shipping data acquisition unit, which is configured to obtain shipping data from different shipping companies, classify the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtain shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; wherein the shipping route related data comprises shipping company code, route code, route departure port, route stopping ports, route destination port, departure time, arrival time at route stopping ports, and destination port arrival time; the ship related data comprises ship identification code, ship cargo type, and ship deadweight; the cargo related data comprises cargo type and cargo capacity; a nine-intersection model constructing unit, which is configured to construct a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data; a consolidation plan determining unit, which is configured to determine a consolidation plan for shipping data based on the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data, and carry out consolidation based on the consolidation plan; the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model comprises nine-intersection model of route and nine-intersection model of time; the method that determining a consolidation plan for shipping data based on the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data, and carrying out consolidation based on the consolidation plan comprises: determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route; when there is a consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time; when the consolidated shipping segment meets a time condition, determining whether there are the goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data; when there are the goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on the ship related data; when the consolidated shipping segment meets requirements for cargo logistics loading, carrying out consolidation in the consolidated shipping segment; the nine-intersection model of route is a 3x3 matrix; and the nine-intersection model of time is a 3x3 matrix.
The limitations of obtaining shipping data from different shipping companies, classifying the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtaining shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; wherein the shipping route related data comprises shipping company code, route code, route departure port, route stopping ports, route destination port, departure time at departure port, arrival time at route stopping ports, and destination port arrival time; the ship related data comprises ship identification code, ship cargo type, and ship deadweight; the cargo related data comprises cargo type and cargo capacity; constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data; determining a consolidation plan based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data; the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model comprises nine-intersection model of route and nine-intersection model of time; the step of determining the consolidation plan based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data comprises: determining a first route and a second route based on the transport request information, and determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment for cargo transportation between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route; when there is the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets a time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time; when the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition, determining whether there are goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data; when there are the goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on the ship related data; and when the consolidated shipping segment meets requirements for cargo logistics loading, determining the at least two target ships based on the consolidated shipping segment wherein the nine-intersection model of route; wherein the nine-intersection model of route is a 3x3 matrix; and the nine-intersection model of time is a 3x3 matrix; as drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, encompass a series of steps that could be performed in the human mind, the managing of commercial activity (business relations), the managing interactions and behaviors between people, and the performance of mathematical concepts. That is, other than reciting the use of generic computer elements (shipping data acquisition unit, non-intersection model constructing unit, consolidation plan determining unit), the claims recite an abstract idea. In particular, obtaining shipping data from different shipping companies, classifying the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtaining shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; encompass steps that can be performed by the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement). In addition, constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data, determining target ships based on the received information and model, and carrying out consolidation based on the consolidation plan; encompass steps that can be performed by the human mind (evaluation, judgement). In addition, determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time, determining whether there are overlapping goods in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on ship related data, carrying out consolidation in the consolidated shipping segment; encompass steps that can be performed by the human mind (observation, evaluation, judgement). As such, the claims recite elements that fall in the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Additionally, receiving transport request information, obtaining shipping data from different shipping companies, classifying the shipping data based on preset information categories, and obtaining shipping route related data, ship related data, and cargo related data; encompass managing business relations, as this encompasses collecting shipping information for ongoing jobs. In addition, constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data, determining two target ships to transport goods based on the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data, and sending instructions to the ships to send the ships from the departure port to destination port; encompass managing business relations, and relationships between people, as this is merely constructing business plans that carriers can perform. In addition, determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time, determining whether there are overlapping goods in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on ship related data, carrying out consolidation in the consolidated shipping segment; encompass managing business relations, and relationships between people, as this is merely constructing business plans that carriers can perform. As such, the claims recite elements that fall into the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. In addition, the claims recite the creation and use of nine-intersection models for routes and time, which encompasses the performance of mathematical concepts. As such, the claims recite the elements that fall into the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. The claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not recite additional elements, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, that improve the functioning of a computer, another technology, or technical field. The claims do not recite the use of, or apply the abstract idea with, a particular machine, the claims do not recite the transformation of an article from one state or thing into another. Finally, the claims do not recite additional elements, taken individually and in an ordered combination, that apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Instead, the claims recite the use of generic computer elements (shipping data acquisition unit, non-intersection model constructing unit, consolidation plan determining unit) as tools used to carry out the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements, when taken individually and in an ordered combination with the abstract idea, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using generic computer elements and machines to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are directed to non-patent eligible subject matter.
Novelty/Non-Obviousness
Claims 1-8 are allowed over the cited prior art, however remain rejected under other statutes. With respect to claim 1, the closest prior art, taken individually and in an ordered combination, encompasses the elements of: “constructing a shipping schedule related nine-intersection model based on the shipping route related data; determining at least two target ships based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data; sending instruction information to the at least two target ships, wherein the instruction information is configured to control the at least two target ships to transport cargo from a departure port to a destination port; the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model comprises nine-intersection model of route and nine-intersection model of time; the step of determining the at least two target ships based on the transport request information, the shipping schedule related nine-intersection model, the cargo related data, and the ship related data comprises: determining a first route and a second route based on the transport request information, and determining whether there is a consolidated shipping segment for cargo transportation between the first route and the second route based on the nine-intersection model of route; when there is the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets a time condition based on the nine-intersection model of time; when the consolidated shipping segment meets the time condition, determining whether there are goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment based on the cargo related data; when there are the goods of the same cargo type in the consolidated shipping segment, determining whether the consolidated shipping segment meets the requirements for cargo logistics loading based on the ship related data; and when the consolidated shipping segment meets requirements for cargo logistics loading, determining the at least two target ships based on the consolidated shipping segment wherein the nine-intersection model of route wherein the nine-intersection model of route {{math}}
PNG
media_image1.png
822
1038
media_image1.png
Greyscale
”
Claims 2-5 (and 7 and 8) depend on claim 1 and therefore are novel and non/obvious via dependency. Claims 6, 7, and 8 (claims 7 and 8 as interpreted as independent) recite similar elements and are additionally novel and non-obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Sumiya WO 2015107827 A1 – Which describes techniques for analyzing a geographic map, including using a 9-intersection model to develop and show the relationship between two points in a geographic region.
Han et al. US 20160117346 A1 – Which describes generating and analyzing spatial analytics, wherein a topology model used to analyze geometry in a geographic region includes the use of a nine-intersection model.
Zhang et al. CN 113280818 A – Which describes modelling routes for a waterway travel, wherein nine-intersection models are used to analyze and construct routes.
Zhou et al. CN 108680163 A – Which describes generating boat routes across a waterway, wherein optimal routes are determined and selected for travel. Additionally, the analytics use a nine-intersection model to further analyze the generated routes and geographic region.
Hayama US 20210302184 A1 – Which describes generating delivery plans for shipments, wherein the time requirements, origin, and destinations for the various shipments are considered.
Arunapuram et al. 20020019759 A1 – Which describes generating shipping plans for multiple shipments, wherein the analysis includes determining the optimal shipment plan. In this aspect, the system determines which shipments can be consolidated into a single shipment, while also satisfying time and location requirements.
Zheng et al. US 20220035374 A1 – Which describes developing shopping plans for water vessels, wherein the plans include optimizing delivery routes in order to satisfy time and location constraints.
Jones et al. US 20170046658 A1 – Which describes developing shipping plans for multiple shippers, wherein a carrier would ship items for the shippers. As part of the planning, the system determines if shipments can be consolidated, and if so, in an optimal manner which would satisfy the various requirements. Additionally, the carriers can be boats that travel across waterways.
Geevarghese, Kochumman. "A Partition-Based Dynamic Routing Algorithm for on-Demand Bus Scheduling in Rural Areas." 10142876 Pace University, 2016. Ann Arbor: ProQuest. Web. 23 Aug. 2024. – Which describes calculating routes and pathways through a geographic area, wherein 9-intersection modelling is used in the analysis.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P HARRINGTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1365. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5.
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, Jeffrey Zimmerman can be reached at (571)-272-4602. 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.
Michael Harrington
Primary Patent Examiner
22 June 2026
Art Unit 3628
/MICHAEL P HARRINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628
Prosecution Insights