DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This communication is a non-final action in response to the communications filed on 5/12/2025. Claims 1-10 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claims 1-10 are determined to be directed to an abstract idea.
The claims 1-10 are directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea), without providing a practical application integration and without providing significantly more.
As per Step 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, Claims 1-10 are directed to a method (i.e., process) which is within statutory categories of invention.
As per Step 2A-Prong 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, Claim 1 is directed specifically to the abstract idea of health assessment method of an aquatic ecosystem based on ecological integrity by step 1, determining criteria consisting of physical habitat, physicochemical properties, and aquatic organisms of the aquatic ecosystem to obtain criterion layers, and obtaining ecological baseline values of candidate indicators by using differentiated ecological baseline determination methods; step 2, sequentially performing applicability verification, sensitivity verification, and redundancy verification on the candidate indicators in that order to select core indicators from the candidate indicators; step 3, performing weighting and summing on the criterion layers of the aquatic ecosystem by using a method combining an entropy weight method and an analytic hierarchy process, to thereby obtain a comprehensive score of the aquatic ecosystem; and step 4, determining a level result of the aquatic ecosystem according to the comprehensive score of the aquatic ecosystem and assessment standard levels and displaying the level result of the aquatic ecosystem; which include mental processes (observing and evaluating habitat/ecological criteria for making an opinion or judgment on comprehensive score and levels of aquatic ecosystem), and certain methods of organizing human activity based on managing personal behavior and interactions between people (following rules and instructions for determining comprehensive score and levels of aquatic ecosystem), and mathematical concepts. Claims 2-10 are directed to the abstract idea of claim 1 with further details on the parameters/attributes of the abstract idea which includes mental processes and certain methods of organizing human activity and mathematical concepts for similar reasons as provided above for claim 1. After considering all claim elements, both individually and in combination and in ordered combination, it has been determined that the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
As per Step 2A-Prong 2 and Step 2B of the subject matter eligibility analysis, the claims 1-10 do not recite additional limitations.
Therefore, since there are no limitations in the claims 1-10 that transform the exception into a patent eligible application such that the claims amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually, the claims are rejected under 35 USC § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Conclusion
Closes prior art to the claimed invention includes:
Wang (CN 114819689 A), regarding “A method for evaluating ecological restoration effect of different types of river sections of medium and small rivers, comprising… according to the change of the score average value after weighting the target factor before and after repairing, judging the ecological restoration effect level based on the repairing degree, dividing the ecological restoration effect into 5 levels, when the two judging results are not consistent, the repairing level is based on the worst level of the two, the target factor refers to the standard layer index related to the repairing target; (6), medium and small river different types of river repairing target threshold value is determined: performing quantization of repairing target with each type of index score not to be weighted, judging whether each river section after evaluating and repairing reaches the expected repairing effect… in order to judge whether each river section after repairing reaches the expected target, the score of each type of river section 6 index is set with a target threshold value, hydrology, water quality, habitat, river bank, aquatic organism 5 criteria layer covers 3 indexes, full score is 15, the water service covers 2 indexes, full score 10, evaluation index total 17 items, the total score is 85; combining the scoring standard of Table 1, quantifying the target with each type of index score not to be weighted, determining different types of river section repairing target threshold value, judging whether each river section after repairing reaches the expected target; In addition, in order to ensure the whole repairing effect, the total score also provides the corresponding score target, the lowest limit of the total score is slightly higher than the lowest limit value of each aspect index and sum, the highest limit value of the total score is the highest limit value of each aspect index plus sum; the lowest limit value of the total score is the integer closest to the lowest limit value of each aspect index, the individual digit number of the integer must be 0 or 5; if the lowest limit value of each aspect index and the post-individual digit is 0 or 5, adding 5 as the lowest limit value of the total score on the basis.”;
Zhao et al (CN 109118101 A), regarding “The invention claims a method for river health evaluating method of multi-sand river, the method from data gathering, goal setting, present survey, system analysis, comprehensive evaluation and so on. constructing more comprehensive system and multi-sand river health assessment index system, reference Protiction related provision, research the river health evaluation method, the index is listed method and evaluation standard, dredging the lake health evaluation index system of the design, by the hydrological water resources, physical structure, water quality, biological and social service function 5 of the rule layer 12 necessary to index and 4 listed, the optional index to evaluate in the health condition of the river; the invention relative to river and lake health evaluation theory and method research aiming to national and no presence of the complete evaluation framework construction suitable for south more overall system of urban river and river health assessment index system, health assessment work of the southern city river.”.
Chen et al (Chen J, Kong Y, Mei Y. Riverine Health Assessment Using Coordinated Development Degree Model Based on Natural and Social Functions in the Lhasa River, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jun 11;19(12):7182. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19127182. PMID: 35742431; PMCID: PMC9223359. (Year: 2022))
Chen et al (Chen L, Ma L, Jiji J, Kong Q, Ni Z, Yan L, Pan C. River Ecosystem Health Assessment Using a Combination Weighting Method: A Case Study of Beijing Section of Yongding River in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Nov 4;19(21):14433. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192114433. PMID: 36361312; PMCID: PMC9655439).
None of the prior art alone or in combination teaches the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHMET YESILDAG whose telephone number is (571)272-3257. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached on (571) 272-6787. 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.
Sincerely,
/MEHMET YESILDAG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624
Prosecution Insights