DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Novel/Non-Obvious Subject Matter
Examiner has determined that all of Applicant’s claims have overcome having prior art rejections. The reason for this is that Examiner does not believe that, at the time of Applicant’s priority date, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine prior art disclosures to result in the particular combinations of elements/limitations in the claims, including the particular configurations of the elements/limitations with respect to each other in the particular combinations, without the use of impermissible hindsight.
Specifically, with respect to both of the independent claims 1 and 12, Examiner as able to put together the following partial rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103:
Potocoko, US 20230306488 A1, in view of Powers, US 20220122031 A1, in further view of Minogue, US 20150034720 A1, in further view of Duggirala, US 20250265510 A1.
As per Claims 1 and 12, Potocoko discloses:
- a system for automated dimensioning of one or more products via a computer having a storage accessing one or more e-Commerce websites via a network connection (paragraph [0002] (“Described herein are systems and methods for obtaining online product information from multiple vendors and providing the user with a normalized pricing schema to enhance user purchasing decisions.”; “Exemplary systems can traverse the Internet and other networks to scrape and/or otherwise collect data from various product listings which can then be used to generate a database of varying products and corresponding attribute data.”); paragraph [0016] (“As described further herein, aspects of the present invention are described below with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems) and non-transitory computer-readable mediums according to embodiments of the invention.”); paragraph [0024] (“Initially at step S200 of FIG. 2 (and throughout operation of the product information extraction system 102), the data management engine 104 will control configuration of the system by controlling the data mining/collection engine 108 to obtain product description information both from internal data stored on databases 134, such as catalog files 116 and punchout data 118 and external data stored on databases 130 such as online data 114 obtained via web-crawling, web-scraping from various websites and/or via Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.”); paragraph [0026] (“The product data 120 can include data parsed and extracted from product description information from a randomly selected product description and can include attributes relating to the product name, type of product, part number, manufacturer, vendor, dimensions, copyright/trademark symbols, quantity and a unit of measurement corresponding to the quantity.”));
- a software module adapted to access a database of information relating to products offered for sale on the one or more e-Commerce websites and executing on the computer (paragraph [0002] (whole paragraph); paragraph [0016] (“As described further herein, aspects of the present invention are described below with reference to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems) and non-transitory computer-readable mediums according to embodiments of the invention.”); paragraph [0022] (software); paragraph [0024] (“Initially at step S200 of FIG. 2 (and throughout operation of the product information extraction system 102), the data management engine 104 will control configuration of the system by controlling the data mining/collection engine 108 to obtain product description information both from internal data stored on databases 134, such as catalog files 116 and punchout data 118 and external data stored on databases 130 such as online data 114 obtained via web-crawling, web-scraping from various websites and/or via Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.”); paragraph [0026] (“The product data 120 can include data parsed and extracted from product description information from a randomly selected product description and can include attributes relating to the product name, type of product, part number, manufacturer, vendor, dimensions, copyright/trademark symbols, quantity and a unit of measurement corresponding to the quantity.”));
- a Data Gathering adapted to extract structural attributes of a product to generate raw product data (paragraph [0002] (“Exemplary systems can traverse the Internet and other networks to scrape and/or otherwise collect data from various product listings which can then be used to generate a database of varying products and corresponding attribute data.”); paragraph [0024] (“Initially at step S200 of FIG. 2 (and throughout operation of the product information extraction system 102), the data management engine 104 will control configuration of the system by controlling the data mining/collection engine 108 to obtain product description information both from internal data stored on databases 134, such as catalog files 116 and punchout data 118 and external data stored on databases 130 such as online data 114 obtained via web-crawling, web-scraping from various websites and/or via Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.”); paragraph [0026] (“The product data 120 can include data parsed and extracted from product description information from a randomly selected product description and can include attributes relating to the product name, type of product, part number, manufacturer, vendor, dimensions, copyright/trademark symbols, quantity and a unit of measurement corresponding to the quantity.”)),
- a Pre-Processing and Cleaning adapted to normalize the raw product data and extract feature data to generate processed data (paragraph [0002] (“This data may then be compared and normalized to provide product comparisons (i.e. cost) to a user even though the originally gathered data may have had different units of data between the products (i.e. package quantity, size, etc).”); paragraph [0026] (“The product data 120 can include data parsed and extracted from product description information from a randomly selected product description and can include attributes relating to the product name, type of product, part number, manufacturer, vendor, dimensions, copyright/trademark symbols, quantity and a unit of measurement corresponding to the quantity.”)).
Potocoko fails to disclose optimized packaging of one or more purchased products. Powers discloses optimized packaging of one or more purchased products (paragraph [0002] (“The present disclosure relates generally to packing and, more specifically, to systems and methods for optimizing packing to achieve a lowest cost shipping solution and visualize the solution as a packing instruction.”); paragraph [0050] (“Bin distance may be used to split up orders within a packing warehouse to increase worker efficiency by decreasing worker overlap and overload.”); paragraph [0074] (cartons)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Potocoko such that the invention optimizes packaging of one or more purchased products, as disclosed by Powers, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
The modified Potocoko fails to disclose software layers. Minogue discloses software layers (paragraph [0063] (“Furthermore, given the typically endless number of manners in which computer programs may be organized into routines, procedures, methods, modules, objects, and the like, as well as the various manners in which program functionality may be allocated among various software layers that are resident within a typical computer (e.g., operating systems, libraries, APIs, applications, applets, etc.), it should be appreciated that the present invention is not limited to the specific organization and allocation of program functionality described herein.”)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the modified Potocoko such that the invention includes software layers, as disclosed by Minogue, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
The modified Potocoko fails to disclose generate missing data via a Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) model. Duggirala discloses generate missing data via a Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) model (paragraph [0016] (“The generative AI model may generate the parameters to supplement or provide additional information to improve execution of the event (e.g., fill in gaps or missing information).”)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of the modified Potocoko such that the invention generates missing data via a Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) model, as disclosed by Duggirala, since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
The above combination of references still would not cover the following independent claim features:
- an Outlier Detection layer adapted to utilize one or more filters to analyze the processed data to identify and remove anomalous data and generate corrected data, which is saved to the computer storage,
- the Gen-AI model is adapted to access the database of information and gather package dimensions for the one or more purchased products;
- the Gen-AI model is adapted to generate a packing configuration for packaging of the one or more purchased products.
Examiner concluded that further references could not be combined with the previous references to attempt to result in the remaining features, without the use of impermissible hindsight. Therefore, the claims do not have prior art rejections.
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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because:
As per Claim 1, the preamble of this claim is directed to a system. However, the only positively recited element of this system in the body of the claim is a software module. Software by itself is neither a process, a machine, a manufacture, nor a composition of matter. Therefore, claim 1 is rejected under 101 as not falling within a statutory class. There is a computer having a storage that is recited in the preamble, and this computer is later recited in the body with respect to that the software module is described as being executed on the computer. However, the computer itself is not positively recited as a component of the system in the body of the system claim. Therefore, the computer may be taken as describing how the software module is used, as opposed to being a further element of the system itself. Claims 2-11 depend from claim 1 and incorporate this 101 issue via such dependencies, while also not positively reciting any further elements of the system. Therefore, claims 2-11 are also rejected under 101 as not falling within a statutory class.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As per Claim(s) 1 and 12, Claim(s) 1 and 12 recite(s):
- determining dimensioning and optimized packaging of one or more purchased products;
- information relating to products offered for sale on the one or more e-Commerce websites;
- a Data Gathering adapted to extract structural attributes of a product to generate raw product data;
- a Pre-Processing and Cleaning adapted to normalize the raw product data, extract feature data, and generate missing dimensional data via a Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) model to generate processed data,
- an Outlier Detection adapted to utilize one or more filters to analyze the processed data to identify and remove anomalous data and generate corrected data;
- the Gen-AI model is adapted to access the information and gather package dimensions for the one or more purchased products;
- the Gen-AI model is adapted to generate a packing configuration for packaging of the one or more purchased products.
Each of the above limitations falls within the abstract-idea category of “Certain methods of organizing human activity.” Specifically, those limitations relate to the following subject matter that is grouped into the category of “Certain methods of organizing human activity”:
- commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations): relates to optimizing packaging of purchased products, so it is a commercial interaction.
To the extent that any of these limitations are recited alongside recitations of generic computer components, as described below in this rejection: If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers subject matter recognized as certain methods of organizing human activity but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain method of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim(s) recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim(s) recite the following additional elements/limitations, each of which are addressed in the list below with the reason(s) why they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application:
- a system; automated; via a computer having a storage accessing one or more e-Commerce websites via a network connection; a software module adapted to access a database of information and executing on the computer; layers; data which is saved to the computer storage; the database; executing within the software module: These element(s)/limitation(s) amount to mere instructions to apply an exception. See MPEP 2106.05(f). In making this determination, examiners may consider whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Mere instructions to apply an exception is a consideration with respect to both integration of an abstract idea into a practical application and significantly more. MPEP 2106.05(f)(2) states: “Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit).” This is the case with these particular claim element(s)/limitation(s). Those elements/limitations do not meaningfully limit the claim because implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer. Therefore, these particular claim element(s)/limitation(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application for at least this reason.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Accordingly, the 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(s) are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, either individually or as an ordered combination. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of computer-related components amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.
The claim(s) are not patent eligible.
As per dependent claim(s) 2-11 and 13-20, these claim(s) incorporate the above abstract idea via their dependencies on the respective independent claim(s). The additional element(s)/limitation(s) of the respective independent claim(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, nor do they add significantly more, with respect to those dependent claim(s), under the same reasoning as above with respect to the respective independent claim(s).
The added elements/limitations of those dependent claim(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application nor add significantly more because they all merely add further functional step(s) and/or detail to the abstract idea; as part of the abstract idea, they cannot integrate into a practical application or be significantly more than the abstract idea of which they are a part. For example, claim 8 merely adds detail regarding the type of filter used.
Claim(s) 1-20 are therefore not drawn to eligible subject matter as they are directed to an abstract idea that is not integrated into a practical application and is without significantly more.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: See the references cited above in this Office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN ERB whose telephone number is (571)272-7606. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 11:30 AM - 8 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, NATHAN UBER can be reached at (571) 270-3923. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
nhe
/NATHAN ERB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3628
Prosecution Insights