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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 (Abstract Idea)
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 – 6 is / are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more analyzed according to 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (“2019 PEG”).
Step 1: The claim 1 is a device claim, do fall into one of the four statutory categories of system claims.
“collect postings related to a security threat from postings of a social networking service (SNS) using a security keyword that is a keyword related to the security threat; extract a co-occurrence keyword that is a keyword co-occurring beyond a predetermined frequency from the collected postings related to the security threat; and collect a posting including the co-occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings of the SNS.”
Corresponding independent claims 5 and 6 are method and CRM claims with identical scope, form and content and therefore are considered with the same rationale.
Step 2A: Prong 1: The limitation of claim 1 recites: “collect postings related to a security threat from postings of a social networking service (SNS) using a security keyword that is a keyword related to the security threat; extract a co-occurrence keyword that is a keyword co-occurring beyond a predetermined frequency from the collected postings related to the security threat; and collect a posting including the co- occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings of the SNS”,
as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the human mind with the aid of pen and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. Except for the words “device comprising: a memory; and processing circuitry… ,” nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed in the human mind with the aid of pen and paper. For example, but for the “device comprising: a memory; and processing circuitry…” language, the steps of “collect … extract … collect a posting including the co-occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings …” encompass the collecting and computing social media posts. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2 – 4 which in turn recite determining security threat, collecting posts over a time interval, etc. is/are mere structural addendums and are other steps that could be performed by human manually with/without need for a computer. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in a human mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas and can be done manually. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements “collect postings related to a security threat from postings of a social networking service (SNS) using a security keyword that is a keyword related to the security threat; extract a co-occurrence keyword that is a keyword co-occurring beyond a predetermined frequency from the collected postings related to the security threat; and collect a posting including the co- occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings of the SNS.” to perform the steps “collect … extract … collect a posting including the co- occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings …” These steps are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic computer performing generic computer functionality (spec. [123], fig. 24) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. The dependent claims’ steps are merely insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering, analysis and generating report), which does not amount to an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements 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 “collect postings related to a security threat from postings of a social networking service (SNS) using a security keyword that is a keyword related to the security threat; extract a co-occurrence keyword that is a keyword co-occurring beyond a predetermined frequency from the collected postings related to the security threat; and collect a posting including the co- occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings of the SNS.” to perform the steps “collect … extract … collect a posting including the co- occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings …” amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Furthermore, the additional elements of determining security threat, collecting posts over a time interval etc.” are merely insignificant extra-solution activity (data gathering), and moreover, these receiving steps are well-known, routine and conventional activities in the art. See MPEP 2106. 05(d).II.i (Receiving or transmitting data over a network). Hence, these additional elements do not amount to an inventive concept. The corresponding dependent claims 2 – 4 are also rejected for the same rationale. The claim is not patent eligible.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) / (2) as being unpatentable by McCoy et al (US 20180285362), Mcc.
Claim 1: Mcc teaches a collection device comprising: a memory; and processing circuitry configured to (Fig. 3): collect postings related to a security threat from postings of a social networking service (SNS) using a security keyword that is a keyword related to the security threat; ([012-14, 67] collecting and analyzing information from social media platforms. The device may rely on rigid approaches to identify connections, such as a keyword search, manual interpretation of potentially related entities, and/or the like. Implementations assign scores based on a predefined element relating to a particular group or subject area, such as an ontology relating to curse words, topics (e.g., racism, supremacy, historically racist figures, terrorism, famous terrorists, etc., extremist groups, behaviors, or ideologies).
extract a co-occurrence keyword that is a keyword co-occurring beyond a predetermined frequency from the collected postings related to the security threat; ([011] a co-occurrence of social media posts associated with a particular location and relating to a particular subject area indicates that a gathering of users associated with the subject area is occurring. [022, 66-67] the scoring platform identifies text data as an unknown recurring phrase. The scoring platform determines that the unknown recurring phrase occurs in multiple data objects that are identified as relevant data objects, and identifies the unknown recurring phrase accordingly... When the preliminary score satisfies a threshold, scoring platform determines that the data object is a relevant data object. Categories and values of a predefined element relating to racism and extremism are detected ... particular keywords (e.g., heil, 14, 88, jihad, uprising, rebellion, etc.), locations associated with racist, extremist, terrorist, or unlawful groups, and/or the like).
and collect a posting including the co-occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings of the SNS. ([082-83] scoring platform determines scores for data objects associated with the users (based on text data, image data, and location data of the data objects), and aggregates the scores over time to determine scores for the users ... Scoring platform collects additional data objects (text, video, image, audio, social media posts, etc.) associated with the one or more users, and may store the additional data objects).
Claim 2: Mcc teaches the collection device according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to select a posting that is likely to be a posting related to the security threat from the postings based on a URL or a domain name extracted from text and an image of the posting collected and output the posting. ([02] identifying, by the device(s), relevant data objects, of the plurality of data objects, based on the text data, and/or based on the image data. [011] a co-occurrence of social media posts relating to a particular subject area may indicate that a gathering of users associated with the subject area is occurring at the particular location. Such analysis may be useful, as an example, for identifying extremist groups, users that are vulnerable to extremist ideologies, an individual or group that poses a threat to public safety, and/or the like. [055] a data object may include a resource identifier (e.g., a uniform resource identifier (URI), a uniform resource locator (URL), a uniform resource name (URN), a network address, a database address, or the like)).
Claim 5: Mcc teaches a collection method performed by a collection device, the collection method comprising: collecting postings related to a security threat from postings of a social networking service (SNS) using a security keyword that is a keyword related to the security threat; extracting a co-occurrence keyword that is a keyword co-occurring beyond a predetermined frequency from the collected postings related to the security threat; and collecting a posting including the co-occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings of the SNS. ([012-14, 67] collecting and analyzing information from social media platforms. The device may rely on rigid approaches to identify connections, such as a keyword search, manual interpretation of potentially related entities, and/or the like. Implementations assign scores based on a predefined element relating to a particular group or subject area, such as an ontology relating to curse words, topics (e.g., racism, supremacy, historically racist figures, terrorism, famous terrorists, etc., extremist groups, behaviors, or ideologies; [011] a co-occurrence of social media posts associated with a particular location and relating to a particular subject area indicates that a gathering of users associated with the subject area is occurring. [022, 66-67] the scoring platform identifies text data as an unknown recurring phrase. The scoring platform determines that the unknown recurring phrase occurs in multiple data objects that are identified as relevant data objects, and identifies the unknown recurring phrase accordingly... When the preliminary score satisfies a threshold, scoring platform determines that the data object is a relevant data object. Categories and values of a predefined element relating to racism and extremism are detected ... particular keywords (e.g., heil, 14, 88, jihad, uprising, rebellion, etc.), locations associated with racist, extremist, terrorist, or unlawful groups, and/or the like; [082-83] scoring platform determines scores for data objects associated with the users (based on text data, image data, and location data of the data objects), and aggregates the scores over time to determine scores for the users ... Scoring platform collects additional data objects (text, video, image, audio, social media posts, etc.) associated with the one or more users, and may store the additional data objects).
Claim 6: Mcc teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing therein a collection program that causes a computer to execute a process comprising [04, 47, 50]: collecting postings related to a security threat from postings of a social networking service (SNS) using a security keyword that is a keyword related to the security threat; extracting a co-occurrence keyword that is a keyword co-occurring beyond a predetermined frequency from the collected postings related to the security threat; and collecting a posting including the co-occurrence keyword and an image associated with the posting from the postings of the SNS. ([012-14, 67] collecting and analyzing information from social media platforms. The device may rely on rigid approaches to identify connections, such as a keyword search, manual interpretation of potentially related entities, and/or the like. Implementations assign scores based on a predefined element relating to a particular group or subject area, such as an ontology relating to curse words, topics (e.g., racism, supremacy, historically racist figures, terrorism, famous terrorists, etc., extremist groups, behaviors, or ideologies; [011] a co-occurrence of social media posts associated with a particular location and relating to a particular subject area indicates that a gathering of users associated with the subject area is occurring. [022, 66-67] the scoring platform identifies text data as an unknown recurring phrase. The scoring platform determines that the unknown recurring phrase occurs in multiple data objects that are identified as relevant data objects, and identifies the unknown recurring phrase accordingly... When the preliminary score satisfies a threshold, scoring platform determines that the data object is a relevant data object. Categories and values of a predefined element relating to racism and extremism are detected ... particular keywords (e.g., heil, 14, 88, jihad, uprising, rebellion, etc.), locations associated with racist, extremist, terrorist, or unlawful groups, and/or the like; [082-83] scoring platform determines scores for data objects associated with the users (based on text data, image data, and location data of the data objects), and aggregates the scores over time to determine scores for the users ... Scoring platform collects additional data objects (text, video, image, audio, social media posts, etc.) associated with the one or more users, and may store the additional data objects).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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, 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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claim(s) 3, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcc as applied to claims above, and further in view of Day (US 20150180746), Day.
Claim 3: Mcc teaches the collection device according to claim 2, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to select the posting as a posting that is likely to be the posting related to the security threat when the URL or the domain name extracted from the text and the image of the posting collected [is not included in a list of URLs or domain names of legitimate websites] or when a usage period of the domain name is less than a predetermined period. ([04] identify relevant data objects, of the plurality of data objects, based on the text data, the image data, and the location data, the relevant data objects being identified based on comparing the text data, the image data, and the location data to a predefined element that identifies values relevant to a particular group or subject area. [011] Such analysis may be useful, as an example, for identifying extremist groups, users that are vulnerable to extremist ideologies, an individual or group that poses a threat to public safety, and/or the like. [013] detect a recurring text, image, or location value that is not identified by the predefined element. [072, 82, 90] a particular group of users may have a tendency to create social media posts with a lexical diversity score that satisfies a threshold … scoring platform may identify lexical diversity scores of a plurality of data objects associated with a particular user to determine whether the particular user is likely to be associated with the particular group of users … scoring platform determines scores for data objects associated with the users (e.g., based on text data, image data, and location data of the data objects), and aggregates the scores over time to determine scores for the users … satisfying a threshold may refer to a value being less than the threshold).
Mcc is silent on posting collected is not included in a list of URLs or domain names of legitimate websites.
But analogous art Day teaches posting collected is not included in a list of URLs or domain names of legitimate websites. ([08] a whitelist mode that triggers warnings if … any website domain that is not listed as specifically allowed. [126] Users determine their desired level of sensitivity and subscribe to one or more sets of black lists or white lists. Black lists can also include graphic images, for example of gang symbols, genitalia, other body parts, etc., and these can be used as reference libraries against which to compare ‘unlisted’ content with graphical algorithms. These concepts relating to user interaction, black lists, white lists, etc. can apply ... with respect to both applications and web pages, and message content).
Therefore, it is prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Mcc to include the idea of posts not in list(s) as taught by Day so that the user system control module blocks storage or transmission of the images or video feed and thus can prevent, inhibit, deter, or monitor the taking or receiving inappropriate pictures [100].
Claim 4: Mcc teaches the collection device according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to collect the posting [for each predetermined period], and extract the co-occurrence keyword from the postings collected [for the predetermined period]. ([04] identify relevant data objects, of the plurality of data objects, based on the text data, the image data, and the location data, the relevant data objects being identified based on comparing the text data, the image data, and the location data to a predefined element that identifies values relevant to a particular group or subject area. [011] a co-occurrence of social media posts relating to a particular subject area may indicate that a gathering of users associated with the subject area is occurring at the particular location. Such analysis may be useful, for identifying extremist groups, users that are vulnerable to extremist ideologies, an individual or group that poses a threat to public safety, and/or the like and [082] and aggregates the scores over time to determine scores for the users).
Mcc is silent on posting collect the posting for each predetermined period.
But analogous art Day teaches posting collect the posting for each predetermined period. ([114] the safety system calls operating system hooks to access SMS messages or other social media data. Operating system hooks can include Android App Managers such as SMS Receiver. The safety system call these hooks over a periodic time interval).
Therefore, it is prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Mcc to include the idea of collecting posts over a period as taught by Day so that the user system control module blocks storage or transmission of the images or video feed and thus can prevent, inhibit, deter, or monitor the taking or receiving inappropriate pictures [100].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Badri Champakesan whose telephone number is (571)270-3867. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8.30am-4.30pm (EST). 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, Jung Kim can be reached at (571) 272-3804. 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.
/BADRINARAYANAN /Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494.
Prosecution Insights