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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
The following is a Non-Final Office Action in response to communication received on 12/3/2025. Claims 1-19 are pending in this application. This is the first action on the merits. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed 6/7/2026 has been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-10 are interpreted as a machine as the claims recite a system with a server and one or more devices performing operations. Claims 11-19 are interpreted as a process as the claims recite a method.
Claims 10 and 19 contains the trademark/trade name National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. Here Claims 10 and 19 are not interpreted as indefinite even though they do recite a trademark National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, as the claims identify the source of the goods not the goods themselves.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claim(s) recite(s) managing use of different natural resources by collecting information, generating predictive rules based on the collected information, collecting additional information and making determinations of the additional collected information based on the predictive rules and displaying the results, further collecting updates to the information used to generate the predictive results and providing a request to generate an updated simulation with the collected updates to the information used to generate the predictive results, where the specific information relates to ocean (marine) use.
The idea of managing use of different natural resources by collecting information, generating predictive rules based on the collected information, collecting additional information and making determinations of the additional collected information based on the predictive rules and displaying the results, further collecting updates to the information used to generate the predictive results and providing a request to generate an updated simulation with the collected updates to the information used to generate the predictive results, where the specific information relates to ocean (marine) use recite observations, evaluations, judgements, and opinions that can be performed in the human mind or with the physical aid of pen and paper as recited in the claim accordingly the claims recite a mental process (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)).
Further the idea of managing use of different natural resources by collecting information, generating predictive rules based on the collected information, collecting additional information and making determinations of the additional collected information based on the predictive rules and displaying the results, further collecting updates to the information used to generate the predictive results and providing a request to generate an updated simulation with the collected updates to the information used to generate the predictive results, where the specific information relates to ocean (marine) use recite fundamental economic principles or practices, that relate to the economy and commerce, and hence the claims recite a certain method of organizing human activity (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)).
Mental processes and certain methods of organizing human activity are in the groupings of enumerated abstracts ideas, and hence the claims recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims merely recite limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application in that the claims merely recite:
(1) Adding the words “apply it” ( or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)) and (2) Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Specifically as recited in the claims:
As per claim 1, the claim recites managing use of different natural resources by collecting information, generating predictive rules based on the collected information, collecting additional information and making determinations of the additional collected information based on the predictive rules and displaying the results, further collecting updates to the information used to generate the predictive results and providing a request to generate an updated simulation with the collected updates to the information used to generate the predictive results, where the specific information relates to ocean (marine) use. Or more specifically as recited in the claims of collecting (receiving) unclassified data over a communication network, using the unclassified data to make predictive models in which an environmental condition meets or fails to meet one or more of a set of rules within one or more predefined thresholds of criteria, receive a dataset of unclassified data for a site of interest, use the previous created models to evaluate the dataset to determine a ranking for the specific site for development (use) or decommissioning (not use) based on the predictions of whether the site meets or fails to meet predefined threshold of at least one criteria, review the results of the ranking, receive additional data to update a dataset of the classified material, and generate a request to reprocess the process simulation for a degree of ranking of the use or not use based on the received additional data update. These are mental process steps and certain method of organizing human activity steps and therefore part of the abstract idea.
The additional elements that these limitations are being performed by software running on a computer (“ a server including a server processor and a server memory operatively coupled to the server processor, the server memory storing server instructions executable by the processor; and one or more user devices, operable by one or more users of the system, each of the one or more of the devices including a user device processor, a user device memory operatively coupled to the user device processor, and a user device display operatively coupled to the user device processor and exhibiting a plurality of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) thereon, the one or more users devices communicating with the server over a communication network, each of the user device memory storing user device instructions executable by the user device processor; the server processor, when executing the server instructions, is configured to:, “the user device processor, when executing the user device instructions, is configured to:”), the predictive models are “ML” algorithms”, and information is displayed and input on “GUIs” merely result in apply it. Here the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. 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 does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. Further these additional elements merely generally link the judicial exception to the field of computers.
Further additionally with respect to the additional element that the algorithm is one or more “ML” algorithms, there are not details about a particular machine learning algorithm or algorithms or how it operates to derive the information other than it is being used to determine a suitability ranking for a specific site of interest for development or decommissioning based on comparisons. The limitation recites only the idea of using one or more ML algorithms without details on how this accomplished. The claim omits any details to how the one or more ML algorithms solves a technical problem, and instead recites only the idea of a solution or outcome, as the claims recite a result oriented solution. The claim invokes one or more generic ML algorithms merely as a tool for making the recited determination rather than purporting to improve the technology or a computer, therefore this results in mere recitation of “apply it”. Further this element is merely generally linking the use of the judicial exception to the field of computers.
As per claim 2, the claim merely recites various different types of rules for meeting regulatory criteria or industry criteria. This merely recites mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities of collecting various rules for meeting regulatory or industry criteria. This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 12 recites substantially the same subject matter as above and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 3, the claim recites storing information in a profile for a specified set of interest, which includes unclassified marine data and the generated output for the specific site. These are methods of organizing human activity and mental process steps of storing inputs and outputs, therefore this is part of the abstract idea. The additional elements that this is being performed by software running on a computer (“wherein the server processor, when executing the server instructions, is further configured to”), merely results in apply it or generally linking it to the field of computers as discussed above previously in claim 1.
As per claim 4, the claim merely describes the type of unclassified information data collected. This is part of the abstract idea of mental process and certain method of organizing human activities, as it is a mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities to collect various data. This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 13 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 5, the claim merely describes the physical characteristics of the sites of data collected. This is part of the abstract idea of mental process and certain method of organizing human activities, as it is a mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities to collect data from various sites. This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 14 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 6, the claim merely describes the environmental characteristics of the sites of data collected. This is part of the abstract idea of mental process and certain method of organizing human activities, as it is a mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities to collect various data. This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 15 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 7, the claim merely describes the marine life of sites of data collected. This is part of the abstract idea of mental process and certain method of organizing human activities, as it is a mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities to collect various data, as broadly recited herein. This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 16 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 8, the claim merely describes the infrastructure of sites of data collected. This is part of the abstract idea of mental process and certain method of organizing human activities, as it is a mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities to collect data from various sites with different characteristics (infrastructure). This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 17 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 9, the claim merely describes the unclassified marine data of data collected as being fishing tracking data. This is part of the abstract idea of mental process and certain method of organizing human activities, as it is a mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities to collect various data, including fishing data as broadly recited herein. This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 18 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 10, the claim merely describes collecting data from another entity, where the entity happens to be NOAA. This is part of the abstract idea of mental process and certain method of organizing human activities, as it is a mental process and certain methods of organizing human activities to collect data from another entity, as broadly recited herein. This is part of the abstract idea. There are no additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea.
Further claim 19 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
As per claim 11, recite managing use of different natural resources by collecting information, generating predictive rules based on the collected information, collecting additional information and making determinations of the additional collected information based on the predictive rules and displaying the results, further collecting updates to the information used to generate the predictive results and providing a request to generate an updated simulation with the collected updates to the information used to generate the predictive results, where the specific information relates to ocean (marine) use. Or more specifically as recited in the claims of collecting (receiving) unclassified data over a communication network, using the unclassified data to make predictive models in which an environmental condition meets or fails to meet one or more of a set of rules within one or more predefined thresholds of criteria, receive a dataset of unclassified data for a site of interest, use the previous created models to evaluate the dataset to determine a ranking for the specific site for development (use) or decommissioning (not use) based on the predictions of whether the site meets or fails to meet predefined threshold of at least one criteria, review the results of the ranking, receive additional data to update a dataset of the classified material, and generate a request to reprocess the process simulation for a degree of ranking of the use or not use based on the received additional data update. These are mental process steps and certain method of organizing human activity steps and therefore part of the abstract idea.
The additional elements that these limitations are being performed by software running on a computer (“providing a server processor and a server memory operatively coupled to the server processor, the server memory storing server instructions executable by the server processor; and providing one or more user devices each including a user device processor, a user device memory operatively coupled to the user device processor, and a user device display operatively coupled to the user device processor and exhibiting a plurality of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) thereon, the one or more user devices communicating with the server over a communication network, each of the user device memory storing user device instructions executable by the user device processor”, “by the server processor”, “by the user processor”), the predictive models are one or more “ML” algorithms”, and information is displayed and input on “GUIs” merely result in apply it and generally linking it to the field of computers as discussed above in claim 1.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claims merely recite limitations that are not indicative of an inventive concept (“significantly more”) in that the claims merely recite:
(1) Adding the words “apply it” ( or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(f)) and (2) Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)), as detailed above with respect to the practical application step.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Hlatky, Jr et al. (United States Patent Number: US 9,195,370).
As per claim 1, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches A system for assessing environmental, fisheries-related, and economic impacts of offshore infrastructure development and decommissioning, the system comprising: (see column 2 lines 9-12, column 7 lines 54-55, and column 12 lines 63- column 13 lines 17, Examiner’s note: system (see column 2 lines 9-12), ocean fishing offshore (see column 7 lines 54-55, tells a user when, where, and how to fish based on previous data (column 12 lines 63- column 13 lines 17). It is noted that the preamble does not limit claim scope, as it merely recites intended purpose or intended use (SEE MPEP 2111.02, 2111.04), however regardless Hlatky, Jr et al. teaches this as development and decommissioning are very broad limitations recited herein in the claims and merely include meanings of use (development) or shut down or not use (decommissioning), which could read on a user using a certain location (development), not using a certain location (decommissioning), or not using a certain lure (decommissioning), based on recommendations provided by the system based on collected and analyzed fishing data).
a server including a server processor and a server memory operatively coupled o the server processor, the server memory storing server instructions executable by the , server processor; and (see column 2 lines 30-45, and column 1 lines 35-40 Examiner’s note: server performing operations (see column 2 lines 30-45) and column 1 lines 35-40 teach software running on a computer performing operations).
one or more user devices, operable by one or more users of the system, each of the one or more user devices including a user device processor, a user device memory operatively coupled to the user device processor, and a user device display operatively coupled to the user device processor and exhibiting a plurality of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) thereon, the one or more user devices communicating with the server over a communication network, each of the user device memory storing user device instructions executable by the user device processor; (see column 4 lines 45-55,. column 12 lines 40-50, and column 19 lines 1-5, Examiner’s note: GUI for displaying results from a server (see column 12 lines 40-50 and column 19 lines 1-5) and further teaches that the client device including instructions, processor, and memory (see column 4 lines 45-55)).
the server processor, when executing the server instructions, is configured to: (see column 2 lines 30-45, Examiner’s note: server performing operations (see column 2 lines 30-45) and column 1 lines 35-40 teach software running on a computer performing operations).
receive, over the communication network, unclassified marine data for a plurality of sites of interest; (see column 2 lines 50- column 3 lines 10 and column 3 lines 18-40, Examiner’s note: here shows the various information that can be received from many different places including users, agencies, shops, magazines, manufacturers, etc. to provide recommendations).
pre-process the received unclassified marine data to generate one or more predictive models including classified data representative of generated predictions of environmental conditions and a generated degree in which the predicted environmental conditions at least one of meets or fails to meet, in accordance with one or more sets of rules and within one or more predefined thresholds, at least one of regulatory criteria or industry criteria; (see column 2 lines 55-60, column 7 lines 22-27, column 9 lines 35-45, and column 4 lines 40-45, Examiner’s note: teaches training a machine learning algorithm like a neural network based on the collected information from above).
receive a dataset of unclassified marine data for a specified site of interest; present the received dataset of unclassified marine data for the specified site to one or more ML algorithms that use the one or more sets of rules and the generated one or more predictive models to evaluate the received dataset and to generate, in accordance with the one or more sets of rules, a suitability ranking for the specified site of interest for development or decommissioning based on a comparison to the generated predictions of environmental conditions and including within the suitability ranking a generated degree that the specified site meets or fails to meet, within at least one of the predefined thresholds, the at least one of regulatory criteria or industry criteria; and host the plurality of GUIs operable to review the generated suitability ranking and generated degree of meeting or failing to meet the regulatory or industry criteria for the specified site of interest; the user device processor, when executing the user device instructions, is configured to: review, by invoking one of the plurality of GUIs, the generated output for one or more of the specified sites of interest; (see column 2 lines 65- column 3 lines 22, column 4 lines 45-65, column 13 lines 22-40, Examiner’s note: providing recommendations to a user in response to a location or legal requirements for a specific location. It is noted that here only one of development and decommissioning is required by the claims. however regardless Hlatky, Jr et al. teaches this as development and decommissioning are very broad limitations here and merely mean use (development) or shut down or not use (decommissioning), which could read on a user using a certain location (development), not using a certain location (decommissioning), not using a certain lure based on regulations (decommissioning), based on the collected and analyzed fishing data).
update, by invoking one of the plurality of GUIs, a value of within the dataset of unclassified marine data; and generate a request to the server processor to reprocess the updated dataset of unclassified marine data to simulate one or more scenarios for development and/or decommissioning and to generate a new suitability ranking and a degree of meeting or failing to meet the regulatory or industry criteria in response thereto (see column 10 liens 65- column 11 liens 10, column 16 lines 40-55, column 19 lines 23-35, Examiner’s note: user can query for different information at different times and locations, information can be provided to the device for analysis over time).
As per claim 2, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches
wherein the one or more sets of rules for meeting at least one regulatory criteria or industry criteria include site ecology including biodiversity and species richness, probability of presence of one or more species of interest, accessibility to ports or user communities of interest, predicted fishing effort, compliance with legal or environmental requirements including species protection zones, essential species designations, or exclusion zones, and operational safety margins, proximity to existing infrastructure or shipping lanes, bathymetric or sediment conditions acceptable for development or decommissioning projects (see column 2 lines 65- column 3 lines 7, Examiner’s note: only one of the above alternative is required by the claims however here teaches how good the fishing is (predicted fishing effort) likely of species or size of fish (probability of presence of one or more species of interest)(essential species designations)).
Claim 12 recites substantially the same subject matter as above and is accordingly rejected under the same grounds.
As per claim 3, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches
wherein the server processor, when executing the server instructions, is further configured to store a site profile for the specified site of interest, the site profile including the unclassified marine data and the generated output for the specified site (see column 2 lines 50- column 3 lines 10 and column 3 lines 18-40, Examiner’s note: here shows the various information that can be received from many different places including users, agencies, shops, magazines, manufacturers, etc. to provide recommendations, where this information may include animal reports at a specific location).
As per claim 4, Hlatky, Jr et al. teaches
wherein the unclassified marine data for the plurality of sites of interest and the specified site of interest includes physical characteristics of the sites, (see column 7 lines 50-60, Examiner’s note: miles offshore information).
environmental conditions of the sites, (see column 8 lines 1-5, Examiner’s note: time of year, phase of the moon, salinity of the water, PH, tidal conditions).
marine life data at the sites, (see column 3 lines 20-40, Examiner’s note; fishing reports at a location).
and infrastructure data at the sites. (see column 7 lines 50-60, Examiner’s note: fishing reports include structure, like pier or bridge).
Claim 13 recites the same subject matter as above and is accordingly rejected under the same grounds.
As per claim 5, Hlatky, Jr et al. teaches
wherein the physical characteristics of the sites include a depth, (see column 7 lines 50-55, Examiner’s note: depth the user’s fished at).
a substrate type, (see column 7 lines 50-60, Examiner’s note: fished in a pool, riffle, or ocean fishing).
and a sediment composition of each of the sites (see column 5 lines 40-45, Examiner’s note: clarity is muddy).
Claim 14 recites the same subject matter as above and is accordingly rejected under the same grounds.
As per claim 6, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches
wherein the environmental conditions of the sites include water temperature, (see column 5 lines 40-50, Examiner’s note: water temperature).
salinity, (see column 8 lines 1-5, Examiner’s note: salinity of the water).
and water quality of each of the sites. (see column 5 lines 40-50, Examiner’s note: clarity (muddy or clear)..
Claim 15 recites the same subject matter as above and is accordingly rejected under the same grounds.
As per claim 7, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches
wherein the marine life data of the sites includes species presence and species absence about each of the sites (see column 2 lines 65- column 3, column 12 lines 5-10,column 24 lines 48-60, Examiner’s note: fish likely to be a location, and receiving alerts for a specific species option, and using this information to determine whether a specific endangered specifies or other species of interest is caught at a high rate to outlaw a specific type of lure).
Claim 16 recites the same subject matter as above and is accordingly rejected under the same grounds.
As per claim 9, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches
wherein the unclassified marine data further includes fishing tracking data (see column 3 lines 18-30, column 5 lines 15-30, column 7 lines 45-65, Examiner’s note: teaches receiving fishing data).
Claim 18 recites the same subject matter as above and is accordingly rejected under the same grounds.
As per claim 11, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches A method for assessing environmental, fisheries-related, and economic impacts of offshore infrastructure development and decommissioning, the method comprising: (see column 5 lines 5-10, column 7 lines 54-55, and column 12 lines 63- column 13 lines 17, Examiner’s note: system (see column 5 lines 5-10), ocean fishing offshore (see column 7 lines 54-55), tells a user when, where, and how to fish based on previous data (column 12 lines 63- column 13 lines 17). It is noted that the preamble does not limit claim scope, as it merely recites intended purpose or intended use (SEE MPEP 2111.02, 2111.04), however regardless Hlatky, Jr et al. teaches this as development and decommissioning are very broad limitations recited herein in the claim and merely include meanings of use (development) or shut down or not use (decommissioning), which could read on a user using a certain location (development), not using a certain location (decommissioning), or not using a certain lure (decommissioning), based on recommendations provided by the system based on collected and analyzed fishing data).
providing a server processor and a server memory operatively coupled to the server processor, the server memory storing server instructions executable by the server processor; (see column 2 lines 30-45 and column 1 lines 35-40, Examiner’s note: server performing operations (see column 2 lines 30-45) and column 1 lines 35-40 teach software running on a computer performing operations).
and providing one or more user devices each including a user device processor, a user device memory operatively coupled to the user device processor, and a user device display operatively coupled to the user device processor and exhibiting a plurality of graphical user interfaces (GUIs) thereon, the one or more user devices communicating with the server over a communication network, each of the user device memory storing user device instructions executable by the user device processor; (see column 4 lines 45-55, column 12 lines 40-50, and column 19 lines 1-5, Examiner’s note: GUI for displaying results from a server (see column 12 lines 40-50 and column 19 lines 1-5) and further teaches that the client device including instructions, processor, and memory (see column 4 lines 45-55)).
receiving, by the server processor, unclassified marine data for a plurality of sites of interest; (see column 2 lines 50- column 3 lines 10 and column 3 lines 18-40, Examiner’s note: here shows the various information that can be received from many different places including users, agencies, shops, magazines, manufacturers, etc. to provide recommendations).
pre-processing the received unclassified marine data to generate one or more predictive models including classified data representative of predicted environmental conditions that meet or fail to meet, in accordance with one or more sets of rules and within one or more predefined thresholds, at least one of regulatory criteria or industry criteria; (see column 2 lines 55-60, column 7 lines 22-27, column 9 lines 35-45, column 4 lines 40-45, Examiner’s note: teaches training a machine learning algorithm like a neural network based on the collected information).
receiving a dataset of unclassified marine data for a specified site of interest;
presenting the received dataset of unclassified marine data for the specified site to one or more ML algorithms that used the one or more sets of rules and the generated one or more predictive models to evaluate the received dataset and to generate, in accordance with the one or more sets of rules, output representative of a suitability of the specified site of interest for development or decommissioning based on the predicted environmental conditions at the specified site meeting or failing to meet, within at least one of the predefined thresholds, the at least one of regulatory criteria or industry criteria; and hosting, by the server processor, the plurality of GUIs operable to review the generated output for the specified site of interest; reviewing, by the user processor invoking one of the plurality of GUIs, the generated output for the specified site of interest; (see column 2 lines 65- column 3 lines 22, column 4 lines 45-65, column 13 lines 22-40, Examiner’s note: providing recommendations to a user in response to a location or legal requirements for a specific location. It is noted that here only one of development and decommissioning is required by the claims. however regardless Hlatky, Jr et al. teaches this as development and decommissioning are very broad limitations here and merely include meanings of use (development) or shut down or not use (decommissioning), which could read on a user using a certain location (development), not using a certain location (decommissioning), not using a certain lure based on regulations (decommissioning), based on the collected and analyzed fishing data).
updating, by invoking one of the plurality of GUIs, a value of within the dataset of unclassified marine data; and generating, by the user processor a request to the server processor to reprocess the updated dataset of unclassified marine data to simulate one or more scenarios for development and/or decommissioning and generation new output in response thereto. (see column 10 lines 65- column 11 lines 10, column 16 lines 40-55, and column 19 lines 23-35, Examiner’s note: user can query for different information at different times and locations, information can be provided to the device for analysis over time).
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(s) 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hlatky, Jr et al. (United States Patent Number: US 9,195,370) further in view of Hardison (United States Patent Application Publication Number: US 2011/0283929)
As per claim 8, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches
wherein the infrastructure data at the sites includes locations and types of existing or proposed infrastructure including at least one of pier, bridge shipwreck (see column 7 lines 50-55, Examiner’s note: pier, bridge, shipwreck, etc).
Hlatky, Jr et al does not expressly teach wherein the infrastructure is one of oil platforms, piping, artificial reefs, and structures within lease blocks.
However, Hardison teaches a known infrastructure or site for fishing includes one of oil platforms, piping, artificial reefs, and structures within lease blocks (see paragraphs 0005-0008, Examiner’s note: using artificial reefs or ship wrecks to provide a favorite site for fisherman. Note only is required by the claims).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Hlatky, Jr with the aforementioned teachings from Hardison with the motivation of including another known site of interest to fisherman for fishing (see Hardison paragraphs 0005-0008), when collecting various sites known for fisherman to fish including piers, bridges, and shipwrecks are known (see Hlatky, Jr column 7 lines 50-55).
Claim 17 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
Claim(s) 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hlatky, Jr et al. (United States Patent Number: US 9,195,370) further in view of Lambie et al. (United States Patent Application Publication Number: US 2014/0350856).
As per claim 10, Hlatky, Jr et al teaches
wherein the fishing tracking data is provided by the various organizations (see column 3 lines 20-30 and column 9 lines 55-65, Examiner’s note: receiving fishing reports from various organizations including tackle shops, magazines, tackle manufacturers, state agencies).
Hlatky, Jr et al does not expressly teach receiving information from National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.
However, Lambie which is in the art of measuring fish populations (see paragraphs 0106-0108) teaches receiving information from National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (see paragraph 0107, Examiner’s note: receiving available information from NOAA’s fish watch).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Hlatky, Jr et al with the aforementioned teachings from Lambie with the motivation of providing a way to receive information from a federal agency regarding fish populations to make estimations of fish populations (see Lambie paragraphs 0106-0108), when receiving various fishing reports from various groups including state agencies to make a determination of fishing (see Hlatky, Jr et al column 3 lines 20-30 and column 9 lines 55-65) and communicating with NOAA (see Hlatky, Jr et al column 24 lines 15-25) are both known.
Claim 19 recites substantially the same subject matter and is rejected under the same grounds as above
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Bailey (United States Patent Application Publication Number: US 2015/0054828) teaches a method of displaying fishing statistics on a GUI (see Figure 1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIERSTEN SUMMERS whose telephone number is (571)272-6542. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7am-3:30pm.
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 on 5712703923. 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.
/KIERSTEN V SUMMERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3626
Prosecution Insights