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 .
Remarks
This action is in response to the application received on 9/11/25. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khetarpal et al. (US 2022/0237097), and further in view of Hamm et al. (US 2011/0074587).
Claims 2-7, 10-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Khetarpal et al. (US 2022/0237097).
Claims 8, 9, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khetarpal, and further in view of Japan Research Institute (JP 7249385B2).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 9/11/25 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-3 and 10 include language that is directed towards contingent limitations (“when there is a request signal”). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-9 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 1 discloses “the user class” in the “when” limitation. This will be interpreted as referring to “a user class.”
Claim 1 discloses “the identified user class” in the “generating” limitation. This will be interpreted as referring to “the user class.”
Claim 2 discloses “the user” in the “when” and “outputting” limitations. There are two previous recitations of “a user”, therefore, it is unclear which recitation this refers to. For purposes of examination, this will be interpreted as referring to recitation of “a user” in the “when” limitation.
Claims 3 and 4 disclose “the predetermined user class” in the “generating” limitation and “the second information” limitation, respectively.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 2A, Prong One asks: Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon (product of nature) or an abstract idea? See MPEP 2106.04 Part I. 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. See MPEP 2106.04(a).
With respect to claims 1-3 and 10, the limitation of “identifying the user class” or “determining… a user class”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, “identifying” in the context of this claim encompasses the user mentally determining information. Similarly, the limitation of “generating, based on the provision information, a user interface screen”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, “generating” in the context of this claim encompasses the user thinking about appropriate information. 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.
At step 2a, prong two, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 recites a terminal, a server, storage and a processor, claim recites storage and a processor, and claim 3 recites a processor, however, these are recited as a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Additionally, the claim recites “transmit a signal,” “retrieving the provision information,” “store a first database… and a second database,” “outputting the generated user interface screen.” and “providing the generated first information to the user.” These elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception and provide only insignificant extra solution activity that is mere data gathering in conjunction with the abstract idea.
The claims do 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 elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.
With respect to “transmit a signal” and “retrieving the provision information”, the courts have found limitations directed towards data gathering to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II). Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information).
With respect to “store a first database… and a second database”, the courts have found limitations directed towards storing to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II). Electronic recordkeeping, Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 225, 110 USPQ2d 1984 (2014) (creating and maintaining "shadow accounts") and “storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
With respect to “outputting the generated user interface screen”, the courts have found limitations directed towards storing to be well-understood, routine, and conventional. See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II). Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Considering the additional elements individually and in combination and the claim as a whole, the additional elements do not provide significantly more than the abstract idea. The claim is not patent eligible.
With respect to claims 4, 5, 11, and 12, the limitations further define data, and do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With respect to claims 6, 7, 13, and 14, the limitations are directed towards a storage device, however, this is recited as a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
With respect to claims 8, 9, 15, and 16, the limitations are directed towards a battery mounted on a vehicle, however, this amounts to no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
With respect to claims 17-20, the non-transitory storage medium recording a program for causing a computer to execute the information processing method of claims 10-13, however, this is recited as a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claims 2-7, 10-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Khetarpal et al. (US 2022/0237097).
With respect to claim 2, Khetarpal teaches an information processing apparatus that provides first information concerning a predetermined target object to a user (Khetarpal, pa 0029, The GUI engine 134 can provide a GUI 142 to the tenant that only display application data for that tenant.), the first information being generated based on one or more pieces of data concerning the predetermined target object (Khetarpal, pa 0025, the intelligent agent 116 can collect data on events that may indicate how the application 114 is performing.), the information processing apparatus comprising:
a storage configured to store:
the one or more pieces of data (Khetarpal, pa 0004, an intelligence server can receive application data from an application executing on multiple user devices. The application data can include usage data, performance data, user behavior data, and device health data.);
user data that is data defining a user accessing the information processing apparatus in association with a user class (Khetarpal, pa 0034, The intelligence server 130 can aggregate the data according to tenant ID so that the data for each tenant ID can be presented exclusively to users of that tenant.); and
second information defining the first information that can be provided to a user belonging to a predetermined user class (Khetarpal, pa 0054, Organizations, users, devices, shipments, and information stored within the system are created, viewed, modified, and deleted according to rules that take into account the object of the action and the entity performing the action. Rather than exhaustively specify the ability or inability of all other parties to perform such actions, these permissions can refer to roles that imply group membership ( e.g. the set of all users belonging to a certain organization, all members of all organizations, all shipments in which a particular organization is a party, etc.). This system allows shared access to information and enables parties to act on this information. Parties collaborate by either actively seeking permission to access and act on data); and
a processor configured to execute:
when there is access from a user (Khetarpal, pa 0033, At stage 220, the intelligence server 130 can receive, from each of the user devices 110, a signed credential that includes a tenant ID identifying a tenant associated with the corresponding user device.), determining, based on the user data, a user class corresponding to the user (Khetarpal, pa 0034, At stage 230, the intelligence server 130 can extract a subset of the application data relating to user devices that have a like tenant identifier. For example, as the intelligence server 130 receives the application data, it can retrieve the tenant ID of the user device that the data originated from. The intelligence server 130 can aggregate the data according to tenant ID so that the data for each tenant ID can be presented exclusively to users of that tenant.);
generating, based on the second information, the first information corresponding to the determined user class (Khetarpal, pa 0035, GUI engine 134 can receive the application data subsets and insert them into the GUI 142. The GUI engine 134 can also manage how the application data is displayed and who has access to which application data subset. For example, the GUI engine 134 can insert application data into the GUI 142 for each tenant ID that is only viewable by that tenant.); and
outputting the generated first information to a terminal of the user (Khetarpal, pa 0035, At stage 240, the intelligence server 130 can provide a GUI 142 to a device associated with the same tenant identifier, the GUI 142 displaying the application data associated with the tenant.).
3. An information processing apparatus that provides first information concerning a predetermined target object to a user (Khetarpal, pa 0029, The GUI engine 134 can provide a GUI 142 to the tenant that only display application data for that tenant.), the first information being generated based on one or more pieces of data concerning the predetermined target object (Khetarpal, pa 0025, the intelligent agent 116 can collect data on events that may indicate how the application 114 is performing.), the information processing apparatus comprising a processor configured to execute:
when there is access from a user (Khetarpal, pa 0033, At stage 220, the intelligence server 130 can receive, from each of the user devices 110, a signed credential that includes a tenant ID identifying a tenant associated with the corresponding user device.), determining, out of a plurality of user classes defined in advance, a user class corresponding to the user (Khetarpal, pa 0034, At stage 230, the intelligence server 130 can extract a subset of the application data relating to user devices that have a like tenant identifier. For example, as the intelligence server 130 receives the application data, it can retrieve the tenant ID of the user device that the data originated from. The intelligence server 130 can aggregate the data according to tenant ID so that the data for each tenant ID can be presented exclusively to users of that tenant.);
generating, based on second information defining the first information that can be provided to the user belonging to the predetermined user class (Khetarpal, pa 0034, as the intelligence server 130 receives the application data, it can retrieve the tenant ID of the user device that the data originated from. The intelligence server 130 can aggregate the data according to tenant ID so that the data for each tenant ID can be presented exclusively to users of that tenant.), the first information corresponding to the determined user class (Khetarpal, pa 0035, GUI engine 134 can receive the application data subsets and insert them into the GUI 142. The GUI engine 134 can also manage how the application data is displayed and who has access to which application data subset. For example, the GUI engine 134 can insert application data into the GUI 142 for each tenant ID that is only viewable by that tenant.); and
providing the generated first information to the user (Khetarpal, pa 0035, At stage 240, the intelligence server 130 can provide a GUI 142 to a device associated with the same tenant identifier, the GUI 142 displaying the application data associated with the tenant.).
With respect to claim 4, Khetarpal teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the first information is provided in units of screens (Khetarpal, pa 0076, The GUI 620 can include a feature that allows the owner to view the application data by specific tenant. For example, the displayed customer information 604 can open a drop-down menu when selected by an admin user. The drop-down menu can display a list of tenants that use the application. The admin user can select a tenant, and the GUI 620 can change to display application data for that tenant.), and the second information is information defining design of a screen provided to the user belonging to the predetermined user class and the first information provided on the screen (Khetarpal, pa 0037, the GUI engine 134 can also create a view of the GUI 142 for the owner of the application 116 that includes additional data. This view can have administrative rights. For example, this admin version of the GUI 142 can display the active users, monthly active users, and application loads, as well as other metrics, for all the user devices. In one example, the admin GUI 142 can also allow an admin user to select a tenant, which would cause the GUI 142 to display that the selected tenant's data. In another example, the admin GUI 142 can also display additional information from the application data that is not viewable by the tenants. Examiner Note: “units of screens” is taught by how much data is provided to user vs. admin, info defining design is taught by which data is provided to user vs. admin).
Khetarpal doesn’t expressly teach
With respect to claim 5, Khetarpal teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the second information includes a generation logic for the first information that uses the one or more pieces of data (Khetarpal, pa 0028, The GUI engine 134 can execute as one or more processes on the intelligence server 130. The GUI engine 134 can format application data for presentation to administrative users, with a goal of providing insight to those users regarding application or device functionality. The GUI engine 134 can generate a GUI 142 that is accessed by tenants).
With respect to claim 6, Khetarpal teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, further comprising a storage configured to store the one or more pieces of data (Khetarpal, pa 0004, an intelligence server can receive application data from an application executing on multiple user devices. The application data can include usage data, performance data, user behavior data, and device health data.).
With respect to claim 7, Khetarpal teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the storage further stores the second information (Khetarpal, pa 0054, Organizations, users, devices, shipments, and information stored within the system are created, viewed, modified, and deleted according to rules that take into account the object of the action and the entity performing the action. Rather than exhaustively specify the ability or inability of all other parties to perform such actions, these permissions can refer to roles that imply group membership ( e.g. the set of all users belonging to a certain organization, all members of all organizations, all shipments in which a particular organization is a party, etc.). This system allows shared access to information and enables parties to act on this information. Parties collaborate by either actively seeking permission to access and act on data).
With respect to claims 10-14 and 17-20, the limitations are essentially the same as claims 2-7 and are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khetarpal et al. (US 2022/0237097), and further in view of Hamm et al. (US 2011/0074587).
With respect to claim 1, Khetarpal teaches a system comprising:
a terminal (Khetarpal, Fig. 1, user devices 110); and
a server (Khetarpal, Fig. 1, intelligence server 130);
wherein the terminal is configured to transmit a signal including battery information to the server (Khetarpal, pa 0030, At stage 210, the intelligence server 130 can receive application data from the application 114 executing on the user devices 110. In an example, the intelligence agent 116 installed on the user devices can collect data relating to the application 114. Some examples of data collected by the intelligence agent 116 can include application performance data, usage data, user behavior data, and device health information … Device health information can include battery health), and
the server includes:
a storage configured to store: a second database which associates user classes with provision information (Khetarpal, pa 0004, an intelligence server can receive application data from an application executing on multiple user devices. The application data can include usage data, performance data, user behavior data, and device health data. & pa 0005, The tenant can be identified using a tenant identifier ("ID"). The intelligence server can group the application data by tenant ID.)
a processor configured to execute:
when there is a request signal including a user id from a user (Khetarpal, pa 0033, At stage 220, the intelligence server 130 can receive, from each of the user devices 110, a signed credential that includes a tenant ID identifying a tenant associated with the corresponding user device.), identifying the user class corresponding to the user id stored in the first database (Khetarpal, pa 0034, At stage 230, the intelligence server 130 can extract a subset of the application data relating to user devices that have a like tenant identifier. For example, as the intelligence server 130 receives the application data, it can retrieve the tenant ID of the user device that the data originated from. The intelligence server 130 can aggregate the data according to tenant ID so that the data for each tenant ID can be presented exclusively to users of that tenant.); …
generating, based on the provision information, a user interface screen corresponding to the identified user class (Khetarpal, pa 0035, GUI engine 134 can receive the application data subsets and insert them into the GUI 142. The GUI engine 134 can also manage how the application data is displayed and who has access to which application data subset. For example, the GUI engine 134 can insert application data into the GUI 142 for each tenant ID that is only viewable by that tenant.); and
outputting the generated user interface screen to a terminal of the user
(Khetarpal, pa 0035, At stage 240, the intelligence server 130 can provide a GUI 142 to a device associated with the same tenant identifier, the GUI 142 displaying the application data associated with the tenant.).
Khetarpal doesn’t expressly discuss a storage configured to store: a first database which associates user ids with user classes; when there is a request signal including a user id from a user, identifying the user class corresponding to the user id stored in the first database, retrieving the provision information corresponding to the user class stored in the second database.
Hamm teaches a first database which associates user ids with user classes (Hamm, pa 0032, User management database 204 may maintain a list of users of the system, user profiles, roles and permissions within the system, user organizations, and the relationship between users and/or other parties);
when there is a request signal including a user id from a user, identifying the user class corresponding to the user id stored in the first database (Hamm, pa 0025, When tracking center 104 receives a request for sensor data from client 108a, tracking center 104 may search a database resident at tracking center 104 and return the requested sensor data, if found. Access to the sensor data may be managed or open. For example, if access is managed, client 108a and/or the customer would need to be authenticated before sensor data is made available to client 108a and/or the customer. & 0051, For example, a party may choose to make information about all of their monitored shipments available to all other parties in the system. Conversely, a party may restrict access to each monitored shipment to only the parties participating in the shipment (e.g. recipient and carrier). This may prevent other parties from accessing the information.);
retrieving the provision information corresponding to the user class stored in the second database (Hamm, pa 0054, Organizations, users, devices, shipments, and information stored within the system are created, viewed, modified, and deleted according to rules that take into account the object of the action and the entity performing the action. Rather than exhaustively specify the ability or inability of all other parties to perform such actions, these permissions can refer to roles that imply group membership ( e.g. the set of all users belonging to a certain organization, all members of all organizations, all shipments in which a particular organization is a party, etc.). This system allows shared access to information and enables parties to act on this information. Parties collaborate by either actively seeking permission to access and act on data);
It would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to have modified Khetarpal with the teachings of Hamm because it ensures that clients only receive data they are authorized to receive (Hamm, pa 0039).
Claims 8, 9, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khetarpal, and further in view of Japan Research Institute (JP 6249385B2).
With respect to claim 8, Khetarpal teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, as discussed above.
Japan Research Institute teaches wherein the predetermined target object is a battery mounted on a predetermined vehicle (Japan Research Institute, pg. 2, last line – pg. 3 first line, an information processing system that manages various types of information about a battery (vehicle battery) installed in an HEV or EV).
It would have been obvious at the effective filing date of the invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to have modified Khetarpal with the teachings of Japan Research Institute because hybrid vehicles (HEV: Hybrid Electric Vehicle) and electric vehicles (EV: Electric Vehicle) become widespread, deterioration diagnosis of secondary batteries (simply referred to as "batteries") mounted in these vehicles has become important (Japan Research Institute, page 2, description paragraph 2).
With respect to claim 9, Khetarpal teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the first information includes information concerning a deterioration degree of the battery (Japan Research Institute, page 3, 4th paragraph, The diagnostic server 120 is installed in the office, office, etc. of a diagnostic company that diagnoses the degree of deterioration of the vehicle battery and the stationary battery. The diagnosis server 120 has a function of diagnosing the degree of deterioration of the vehicle battery and the stationary battery. The diagnosis server 120 stores the measurement data of the vehicle battery measured by the diagnostic devices 50, 60, and 70, and the diagnosis results of the diagnosis of the degree of deterioration of the vehicle battery by the diagnosis operator based on the measurement data in the diagnosis database 122a).
With respect to claims 15 and 16, the limitations are essentially the same as claims 8 and 9 and are rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Goluguri et al. (US 10,726,642) discusses vehicle data sharing based on categories of sensor data and recipients of those categories.
Billman et al. (US 12,028,323) teaches provision requirements of protected systems for client access levels.
TWI728329B teaches a management device for a vehicle battery that maintains the usage history for the battery.
N. M. Drogeanu, L.A. Perişoară and J.A. Văduva, "Web Interface for IoT Vehicle Monitoring System," 2022 IEEE 28th International Symposium for Design and Technology in Electronic Packaging (SIITME), Bucharest, Romania, 2022, pp. 185-190. This reference teaches an interface for monitor a vehicle including battery information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY N ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3566. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5:00 pm 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, Sherief Badawi can be reached at 571-272-9782. 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.
/BRITTANY N ALLEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169
Prosecution Insights