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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 16 January 2026 has been entered.
Formal Matters
Applicant's response, filed 16 January 2026, has been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Status of Claims
Claims 31-64 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim 64 has been added.
Claims 31-64 have been rejected.
Priority
The instant application claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. § 120, 121, or 365(c). Accordingly, the effective filing date for the instant application is 26 March 2021 claiming benefit to Provisional Application 63/166,427.
Objections
Claim 64 is objected to for the following informality:
the platform user interface is operable to: displays….; enable selection…; alters contain inconsistent verb tense with the claim’s subject.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 31-64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1 – Statutory Categories of Invention:
Claims 31-64 are drawn to a system, manufacture, or method, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A – Judicial Exception Analysis, Prong 1:
Independent claim 31 recites a system for determining a pathogen risk to one or more users in part performing the steps of [storing] a knowledge base including a plurality of infection risk tuples and a plurality of recommendation tuples, wherein the infection risk tuples each include a pathogen, one or more pathogen parameters that affect an infection risk to the pathogen, and an infection risk value that defines a likelihood of a user having the pathogen parameters to be infected by the pathogen, and further wherein the recommendation tuples each include a pathogen susceptibility condition, one or more factors that affect the pathogen susceptibility condition and a relationship that indicates how the factors affect the pathogen susceptibility condition; and enable the user to select at least one target pathogen and to input personal characteristics including at least an age, sex, location and occupation of the user; determine a general pathogen risk score and an adjusted infection risk value of the user, wherein the general pathogen risk score is a quantified risk of a population of people being infected by a target pathogen based on at least one of the infection risk tuples, and the adjusted infection risk value is a risk of the user being infected by the target pathogen based on an infection risk value of one of the infection risk tuples that includes the target pathogen and pathogen parameters that match one or more personal characteristics of the user; enable the user to select one or more of the pathogen susceptibility conditions as selected conditions; generate a navigation image that concurrently displays one or more relationship strength features adjacent to a network web, wherein the network web graphically illustrates nodes representing the selected conditions and visible connections between each of the nodes and one or more related factors of the factors that have an identified relationship with the selected conditions according to the recommendation tuples that include the selected conditions, wherein the visible connections indicate how the one or more factors affect the selected conditions; enable the user to selectively input changes to one or more relationship strength threshold values associated with the selected conditions using the relationship strength features; and dynamically alter the network web as concurrently displayed based on the input changes to the relationship strength threshold values, wherein the altering of the network web is such that the one or more related factors included in the network web is modified to only be a set of the related factors whose identified relationship to the selected conditions, according to the recommendation tuples that include the selected conditions, falls within one or more relationship strength ranges defined by the relationship strength threshold values for the selected conditions.
Independent claim 42 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium for determining a pathogen risk in part performing the steps of [storing] a knowledge base including a plurality of infection risk tuples and a plurality of recommendation tuples, wherein the infection risk tuples each include a pathogen, one or more pathogen parameters that affect an infection risk to the pathogen, and an infection risk value that defines a likelihood of a user having the pathogen parameters to be infected by the pathogen, and further wherein the recommendation tuples each include a pathogen susceptibility condition, one or more factors that affect the pathogen susceptibility condition and a relationship that indicates how the factors affect the pathogen susceptibility condition; determine a general pathogen risk score and an adjusted infection risk value of the user, wherein the general pathogen risk score is a quantified risk of a population of people being infected by a target pathogen based on at least one of the infection risk tuples, and the adjusted infection risk value is a risk of the user being infected by the target pathogen based on an infection risk value of one of the infection risk tuples that includes the target pathogen and pathogen parameters that match one or more personal characteristics of the user; enable the user to select at least one target pathogen and to input personal characteristics including at least an age, sex, location and occupation of the user; enable the user to select one or more of the pathogen susceptibility conditions as selected conditions; generate a navigation image that concurrently displays one or more relationship strength features adjacent to a network web, wherein the network web graphically illustrates nodes representing the selected conditions and visible connections between each of the nodes and one or more related factors of the factors that have an identified relationship with the selected conditions according to the recommendation tuples that include the selected conditions, wherein the visible connections indicate how the one or more factors affect the selected conditions; enable the user to selectively input changes to one or more relationship strength threshold values associated with the selected conditions using the relationship strength features; and dynamically alter the network web as concurrently displayed based on the input changes to the relationship strength threshold values, wherein the altering of the network web is such that the one or more related factors included in the network web is modified to only be a set of the related factors whose identified relationship to the selected conditions, according to the recommendation tuples that include the selected conditions, falls within one or more relationship strength ranges defined by the relationship strength threshold values for the selected conditions..
Independent claim 53 recites a method for determining a pathogen risk in part performing the steps of providing a knowledge base including a plurality of infection risk tuples and a plurality of recommendation tuples, wherein the infection risk tuples each include a pathogen, one or more pathogen parameters that affect an infection risk to the pathogen, and an infection risk value that defines a likelihood of a user having the pathogen parameters to be infected by the pathogen, and further wherein the recommendation tuples each include a pathogen susceptibility condition, one or more factors that affect the pathogen susceptibility condition and a relationship that indicates how the factors affect the pathogen susceptibility condition; and; determine a general pathogen risk score and an adjusted infection risk value of the user, wherein the general pathogen risk score is a quantified risk of a population of people being infected by a target pathogen based on at least one the infection risk tuples, and the adjusted infection risk value is a risk of the user being infected by the target pathogen based on an infection risk value of one of the infection risk tuples that includes the target pathogen and pathogen parameters that match one or more personal characteristics of the user; enable the user to select at least one target pathogen and to input personal characteristics including at least an age, sex, location and occupation of the user; enable the user to select one or more of the pathogen susceptibility conditions as selected conditions; generate a navigation image that concurrently displays one or more relationship strength features adjacent to a network web, wherein the network web graphically illustrates nodes representing the selected conditions and visible connections between each of the nodes and one or more related factors of the factors that have an identified relationship with the selected conditions according to the recommendation tuples that include the selected conditions, wherein the visible connections indicate how the one or more factors affect the selected conditions; enable the user to selectively input changes to one or more relationship strength threshold values associated with the selected conditions using the relationship strength features; and dynamically alter the network web as concurrently displayed based on the input changes to the relationship strength threshold values, wherein the altering of the network web is such that the one or more related factors included in the network web is modified to only be a set of the related factors whose identified relationship to the selected conditions, according to the recommendation tuples that include the selected conditions, falls within one or more relationship strength ranges defined by the relationship strength threshold values for the selected conditions.
These steps of collecting pathogen risk data and providing a user different information based on receiving changing risk factors amount to methods of organizing human activity which includes functions relating to interpersonal and intrapersonal activities, such as managing relationships or transactions between people, social activities, and human behavior; satisfying or avoiding a legal obligation; advertising, marketing, and sales activities or behaviors; and managing human mental activity (MPEP § 2106.04(a}{2)(II}(C) citing the abstract idea grouping for methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people similar to iii. a mental process that a neurologist should follow when testing a patient for nervous system malfunctions, In re Meyer, 688 F.2d 789, 791-93, 215 USPQ 193, 194-96 (CCPA 1982) — also note October 2019 Update: Subject Matter Eligibility on p. 5 and MPEP § 2106.04(a){2)(II) stating certain activity between a person and a computer may fall within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping).
Dependent claim 32, 43, and 54 recites, in part, the [interface] has an article feature and upon selection of the article feature is operable to generate: a documentation page including a document identifier that identifies a document that connects one of the selected conditions to one of the factors of the one of the selected conditions and an excerpt of the document that indicates a connection between the one of the selected conditions and the one of the factors.
Dependent claim 33, 44, and 55 recites, in part, wherein the pathogen parameters include one or more of a group consisting of: age, sex, weight, height, ethnicity, location, vaccination status, smoking habits, medications, medical conditions, topical agents, worn materials and social distancing behavior.
Dependent claim 34, 45, and 56 recites, in part, wherein the personal characteristics include one or more of a group consisting of: age, sex, weight, height, ethnicity, location, vaccination status, smoking habits, current medications, current medical conditions, current topical agents, current worn materials and social distancing behavior.
Dependent claim 35, 46, and 57 recites, in part, wherein the population of people is the entire population of people described in the pathogen knowledge base regardless of their personal characteristics.
Dependent claim 36, 47, and 58 recites, in part, wherein the average pathogen risk is based on: a risk of being infected by the pathogen to the population of people; and an average occupational risk factor considering all occupations of the occupational risk table.
Dependent claim 37, 48, and 59 recites, in part, dynamically measures and inputs one or more of the parameters of the user, the one or more parameters comprising one or more of heart rate, blood oxygen level and respiratory rate.
Dependent claim 38, 49, and 60 recites, in part, determine a current location of the computing device/the user and determine one or more businesses and events near the current location.
Dependent claim 39, 50, and 61 recites, in part, using an event/business pathogen risk database, determine an event pathogen risk value for each of the one or more businesses and events based on at least one of a type of the business or the event and a location of the business or the event.
Dependent claim 40, 51, and 62 recites, in part, provide one or more pathogen recommendations to the user, wherein the pathogen recommendations indicate the event pathogen risk value for each of the one or more businesses and events based on a type of the business or the event.
Dependent claim 41, 52, and 63 recites, in part, determine an overall pathogen risk score for the user by averaging the difference for each of the pathogens for the user.
Dependent claim 64 recites, in part, display a list of the related factors and the selected conditions of the network web as concurrently displayed; enable selection of a subset of the related factors and the selected conditions; and dynamically alters the network web as concurrently displayed based on the subset such that the related factors and the selected conditions of the subset are emphasized within the network web with respect to the related factors and the selected conditions that are not a part of the subset.
Each of these steps of the preceding dependent claims 32-41, 43-52, and 54-64 only serve to further limit or specify the features of independent claims 31, 42, and 53 accordingly, and hence are nonetheless directed towards fundamentally the same abstract idea as the independent claim and utilize the additional elements analyzed below in the expected manner.
Step 2A – Judicial Exception Analysis, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements within the claims only amount to instructions to implement the judicial exception using a computer [MPEP 2106.05(f)].
Claims 31, 42, and 53 recite a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a knowledge base and a digital vaccine platform. Claims 31, 42, and 53 recite a digital image. Claims 32, 42, 43, 53, and 54 recite a platform user interface. The specification defines the computer, memory, and user interface/digital image as any suitable generic combination of hardware and software components for performing the steps of the abstract idea (see the Specification on p. 15 line 12 – p. 16 line 15. Therefore, the use of the a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a knowledge base and a digital vaccine platform, digital image, platform user interface, and computing device in this case to determine a pathogen risk and provide pathogen risk recommendations to one or more users, only recites the hardware components as a tool to apply data to an algorithm and report the results (MPEP § 2106.05(f}(2) see case involving a commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer within the “Other examples.. 3.”) amounting to instruction to implement the abstract idea using a general purpose computer. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 1357 (2014).
Step 2B – Additional Elements that Amount to Significantly More:
The present claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to more than the abstract idea because the additional elements or combination of elements amount to no more than a recitation of instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer.
Claims 31, 42, and 53 recite a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a knowledge base and a digital vaccine platform. Claims 31, 42, and 53 recite a digital image. Claims 32, 42, 43, 53, and 54 recite a platform user interface.
Each of these elements is only recited as a tool for performing steps of the abstract idea, such as the use of the storage mediums to store data, the computer and data processing devices to apply the algorithm, and the display device to display selected results of the algorithm. These additional elements therefore only amount to mere instructions to perform the abstract idea using a computer and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2016.05(f) see for additional guidance on the “mere instructions to apply an exception”).
Each additional element under Step 2A, Prong 2 is analyzed in light of the specification’s explanation of the additional element’s structure. The claimed invention’s additional elements do not have sufficient structure in the specification to be considered a not well-understood, routine, and conventional use of generic computer components. Note that the specification can support the conventionality of generic computer components if “the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112(a)” (Berkheimer in III. Impact on Examination Procedure, A. Formulating Rejections, 1. on p. 3).
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation.
Claims 31-64 are therefore rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 16 January 2026 with respect to 35 USC § 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The response is organized according to Applicant’s presented headings.
Response to Arguments
Applicant asserts that changing a display of a network web to emphasize within the network web with respect to the related factors and the selected conditions that are not a part of the subset in response to a user selection is an improvement to technology. Examiner disagrees. First, there are no specific functions in the claim about how the display is occurring, only the general idea of the effects of the output – that is, the claim is recited at such a high level of generality, there are no technical features to the “emphasis” action. Applicant’s assertion that the claim recites a “method of navigation” is not represented in the claim. Second, Examiner sustains that the discussion in the specification fails to recite a problem in “database navigation” on a user interface. The paragraph recited by Applicant (see the instant specification in ¶ 0003). The organization, digestion, and presentation of complicated or large amounts of data is not a problem with technology, but with the abstract idea of data organization and presentation.
Rejections Under 35 USC § 101
Applicant asserts that similar to Ex Parte Desjardins, the claims recite a technical improvement to a technical problem. Ex Parte Desjardins is directed towards a machine learning model application – Examiner cannot extrapolate the conclusions of the case to the instant claims. Applicant asserts that the instant claims do not recite merely an abstract idea but instead are directed towards an improvement the technological field of graphical user interfaces similar to Data Engine Techs. LLC. Examiner disagrees. As stated in the previous office action dated 09/11/2025, unlike in Data Engine Techs, the instant claims merely display data concurrently. There is no discussion in the specification regarding a technological problem with displays - only merely that the data may be “navigated” at a high level of generality as stated by Applicant. Applicant asserts that “dynamic changing of the network web based on adjustments to the values of concurrently displayed relationship strength features are techniques that are unique to computers”. Examiner is not persuaded, displaying data, no matter the complexity of the data, is not a technological problem. There is no indication in the specification that such data could not previously been displayed by a computer or that the display of such data improves the functioning of computers in any way. Therefore, the rejection is maintained. Therefore, an improvement to the abstract ideas of displaying a network web and updating a web with adjustment values does not amount to an improvement to technology or a technical field (see MPEP § 2106.05(a)(III) stating “it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology). The instant claims are more similar to Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019) wherein the Court determined that the claimed user interface simply provided a trader with more information to facilitate market trades, which improved the business process of market trading but did not improve computers or technology”.
Applicant asserts the instant claim is similar to Trading Techs. Int’l v CQG. Examiner disagrees. The solution has to be specific in nature in response to the problem, as cited in the case holding, "the claims require a specific, structured graphical user interface paired with a prescribed functionality directly related to the graphical user interface’s structure that is addressed to and resolves a specifically identified problem in the prior state of the art." Unlike in Trading Tech, the merely “emphasizing” in any known manner a portion of a network display does not provide unique display functionality or provide a dynamic user interface and is therefore not a practical application of the recited judicial exception.
New Claim
Applicant reasserts the arguments previously stated regarding dependent claim 64 being an improvement to display technology. Examiner sustains the response as outlined above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN LYNN JACKSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5389. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-4:30PM ET.
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, Arleen M Vazquez can be reached at (571) 272-2619. 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.
/JORDAN L JACKSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857