DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed under 37 CFR §1.53(d) for the instant application on September 29, 2025. The Applicants have properly set forth the RCE, which has been entered into the application, and an examination on the merits follows herewith.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-13, 15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 11,533,397 to Hansen et al. (“Hansen”), over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0187913 to Nelken et al. (“Nelken”), over U.S. Patent No. 6,163,779 to Mantha et al. (“Mantha”), over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0258472 to Shirey (“Shirey”), over U.S. Patent No. 9,160,856 to Mairs (“Mairs”), and also over U.S. Patent No. 9,614,964 to Stepanian (“Stepanian”).
Regarding claim 1, Hansen describes systems, apparatus and methods for improving a user’s on-hold experience (see e.g. column 2, lines 12-32). Like claimed, Hansen particularly teaches:
obtaining first input information and determining a service type to which the first input information belongs (see e.g. column 3, line 23 – column 4, line 19; and FIG. 2: Hansen describes a process in which a call routing server and/or on-hold server of an enterprise (i) receives a call from a user device, (ii) places the call in an on-hold queue, (iii) determines that the call is from a known phone number, (iv) sends a push notification to the user device to open an application or website thereon, (v) receives and verifies authentication credentials of the calling user, and then (vi) directs the application or website to open a chat window on the user device. Hansen discloses that the on-hold server then determines the intent of the call using information received via the chat window, for example by receiving a user selection of an option displayed to the user via the chat window – see e.g. column 4, lines 30-45. The information received via the chat window and indicating the intent of the call is considered “first input information” like claimed. Hansen discloses that the determined intent of the call can later be used to identify one or more customer service representatives to provide assistance to the user – see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27. Accordingly, the determined intent is indicative of a service type to which the first input information belongs.);
outputting visual guidance information for the first input information, the visual guidance information being generated when the first input information is in a queuing state and is used to indicate a visual response mode (see e.g. column 4, line 59 – column 5, line 13; and column 6, lines 1-16: Hansen discloses that if no customer service representative is available to take the user’s call, the on-hold server offers one or more digital options through the chat window, wherein the one or more options are tailored based on the intent of the call. Specifically, one or more of the options are an attempt to electronically resolve the user’s issues as indicated by the intent of the call – see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16. The one or more options output to the user via the chat window are considered “visual guidance information” like claimed, wherein the one or more options are generated when the first input information is in a queuing state, i.e. when the user is on-hold. The one or more options are further considered indicative of a visual response mode, as they are selectable to present a visual response that attempts to electronically resolve the user’s issues without involving a customer service representative – see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16.); and
outputting a visual response for the first input information based on the visual response mode in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information (see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16: Hansen suggests that the user can select one of the options in the chat window to be presented with corresponding visual information to resolve his or her issues. The presented information is considered a visual response for the first input information based on the visual response mode, and is output in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information, i.e. in response to a selection operation on one of the options.),
including outputting a visual information viewing window and presenting the visual response in the visual information viewing window (see e.g. column 3, lines 13-22; and column 6, lines 1-16: like noted above, Hansen teaches outputting information corresponding to a selected option in the chat window. The chat window can be considered a visual information viewing window like claimed.).
Accordingly, Hansen teaches a visual interaction method similar to that of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach performing semantic recognition on the first input information to determine the service type to which the first input information belongs, or that the visual guidance information is output in response to a query request for the first input information, as is required by claim 1. Hansen also does not explicitly disclose that the visual information viewing window synchronously displays response text information obtained by semantic analysis of information content of the visual response, wherein the visual information viewing window includes a response content save interface and a specified service type switching interface, and whereby in response to a trigger operation on the response content save interface, to-be-saved identification information of the visual response including an address of the visual response is obtained, as is further required by claim 1. In addition, while Hansen suggests that a live agent can be selected to assist the user from a team corresponding to the service type (i.e. intent) determined from the first input information (see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27), Hansen does not explicitly teach updating a display state of the specified service type switching interface in response to the first input information switching from the queuing state to a processing state, and outputting a service response page in response to a switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface when the first input information is in the processing state, wherein the service response page is associated with a communication link to the live agent corresponding to the first input information, as is further required by claim 1.
Nelken nevertheless teaches enabling a customer to enter a natural language query that is provided to an organization, which then responds to the query (see e.g. paragraphs 0003-0007 and 0010). Particularly, like claimed, Nelken teaches: (i) obtaining first input information (i.e. a natural language query); (ii) performing semantic recognition on the first input information to determine a service type (e.g. a concept and/or category) to which the first input information belongs (i.e. linguistically analyzing the query to extract concepts therefrom, and matching the query to one or more pre-defined categories using the extracted concepts); (iii) outputting visual guidance information (i.e. suggested responses) for the first input information in response to a query request for the first input information (i.e. in response to sending the natural language query and optionally other metadata to a server); and (iv) outputting a visual response for the first input information in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information (e.g. in response to selecting a link of a suggested response) (see e.g. paragraphs 0010-0011, 0024, 0026, 0028, 0031-0035, and 0038-0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen and Nelken before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input belongs, and whereby the visual guidance information for the first input information is output in response to a query request for the first input information. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable customers to more naturally communicate with an organization or enterprise, as is evident from Nelken (see e.g. paragraph 0028).
Mantha generally teaches enabling a user to locally save displayed content (i.e. a web page) via a response content save interface (see e.g. column 1, line 62 – column 2, line 21; column 8, line 15 – column 9, line 15; and FIGS. 5A-D). Mantha further suggests that, in response to a trigger operation on the response content save interface, to-be-saved identification information of the displayed content including an address of the displayed content is obtained (see e.g. column 2, lines 11-62; column 10, lines 9-39; and column 11, lines 41-65: Mantha discloses that locally saving a copy of a displayed web page entails: (i) copying the base HTML document of the web page to local storage and establishing a pointer to the locally-stored page; (ii) creating a list of hypertext references/URLs within the original page, whereby the references/URLs that point to files such as images are identified and used to retrieve and store the corresponding files in local storage; (iii) creating a second list comprising references/URLs to the local storage for the locally-stored files; and (iv) within the locally-stored HTML page, substituting the references/URLs to the locally-stored files for the original references/URLs. The pointer to the locally-stored HTML page, the reference/URL within the original page to a file, and/or the reference/URL to the locally-stored file can be considered “to-be-saved identification information” that includes an address of the displayed content like claimed. Moreover, Mantha suggests that the web page can alternatively be stored via a bookmark – see e.g. column 8, lines 52-61; and FIGS. 5C. Such a bookmark to the web page can additionally or alternatively be considered “to-be-saved identification information” that comprises an address of the webpage.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken and Mantha before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen and Nelken so as to display in the visual information viewing window a response content save interface like taught by Mantha, whereby in response to a trigger operation on the response content save interface, to-be-saved identification information of the displayed content (i.e. the visual response) including an address of the displayed content is obtained. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to save the content so that it can be later accessed and displayed, as is evident from Mantha (see e.g. column 1, lines 41-65; and column 8, line 15 – column 9, line 15).
Shirey generally describes a computer-implemented for providing topic-based navigation, wherein a semantic analysis is performed on received video content to identify topics within the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018 and 0025-0027). When the video is later played, e.g. within a web page, textual information (e.g. a table of contents) indicating the topics identified by the semantic analysis is displayed synchronously with the video and can be used to navigate to corresponding portions of the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018, 0031, 0036, 0038 and 0042-0043, and FIG. 7).
As noted above, Hansen teaches outputting a visual information viewing window and presenting a visual response in the visual information viewing window. Hansen further teaches that the visual response can comprise video, inter alia (see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha and Shirey before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken and Mantha so as to synchronously display, in the visual information viewing window, text information (e.g. topics within a table of contents) like taught by Shirey, which is obtained by semantic analysis of the video (i.e. of information content of the visual response). Such text information is considered “response text information” like claimed. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to efficiently identify and navigate to relevant portions of the video, as is taught by Shirey (see e.g. paragraphs 0005-0006 and 0019).
Mairs generally teaches initiating an availability alerting service in response to the non-completion of an initial call from a calling party to a called party (e.g. because the called party is busy), whereby the availability alerting service transmits availability update messages to alert the calling party when the called party (e.g. a contact center) is available to accept an incoming call (see e.g. column 2, lines 14-43; column 4, line 43 – column 5, line 33; and column 14, line 15 – column 15, line 12). Regarding the claimed invention, Mairs particularly teaches that the availability alerting service provides for display of an indicator, such as an icon, on the display of the calling party, wherein the display state of the indicator is updated in response to the called party changing to an available state, and wherein a communication link (i.e. a call) with the called party is initiated in response to a trigger operation on the indicator when the called party is in an available state (see e.g. column 5, lines 39-57; column 19, line 52 – column 20, line 10; and column 20, line 31 – column 21, line 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha and Shirey so as to also display in the visual information viewing window an indicator like taught by Mairs, wherein a display state of the indicator is updated in response to the called party (i.e. a customer service representative) becoming available (i.e. in response to the first input information switching from the queuing state to a processing state), and wherein a service (i.e. a call) is initiated in response to a trigger operation on the indicator when the called party is available (i.e. when the first input information is in the processing state), the service being associated with a communication link (i.e. a call to a live agent corresponding to the first input information). Such an indicator is considered a “specified service type switching interface” like claimed. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would aid the calling party in deciding upon an appropriate time to contact a recipient that is convenient for both parties, as is taught by Mairs (see e.g. column 20, lines 5-9). Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs are thus considered to teach a method similar to that of claim 1, but do not explicitly teach outputting a service response page in response to the switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface, wherein the service response page is associated with the communication link to the live agent corresponding to the first input information, as is required by claim 1.
Stepanian nevertheless provides such a teaching. Particularly, similar to Hansen, Stepanian teaches enabling a user to perform troubleshooting while waiting in a queue to be connected to a human support agent (see e.g. column 7, lines 20-45). Regarding the claimed invention, Stepanian further teaches displaying a specified service type switching interface (e.g. a “start call” button), and outputting a service response page (e.g. an image of a support person, pictures illustrating aspects of a consumer device, and/or textual instructions) in response to a switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface, the service response page being associated with a communication link to a live agent (see e.g. column 7, lines 12-19; column 13, line 65 – column 14, line 32; and FIGS. 14A, 14B and 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs so as to further output a service response page in response to the switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface, wherein the service response page is associated with the communication link to the live agent (i.e. corresponding to the first input information), like taught by Stepanian. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a service response page because it can provide useful information to the user during his or her call with a human support agent, as is suggested by Stepanian (see e.g. column 7, lines 12-19; and column 13, line 65 – column 14, line 32). Hansen suggests that the live agent can be selected to assist the user from a team corresponding to the service type (i.e. intent) determined from the first input information (see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27). As noted above, it would have been obvious to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input belongs. It thereby follows that the live agent would be selected from a team corresponding to the service type determined from the first input information by the semantic recognition. Accordingly, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a visual interaction method like that of claim 1.
As per claim 2, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Hansen so that the first input information additionally or alternatively can include a natural language query like taught by Nelken. Nelken particularly teaches that presenting a visual response (i.e. suggested responses) to such a query includes presenting a visual response whose matching degree (i.e. “match score”) with the first input information satisfies a response condition (e.g. satisfies a predetermined threshold level) (see e.g. paragraphs 0011, 0029, 0032-0034 and 0037-0038). Accordingly, it follows that with the combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, the visual response presented in the visual information viewing window would satisfy a response condition. The above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is thus further considered to teach a method like that of claim 2.
As per claim 3, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information additionally or alternatively can include a natural language query like taught by Nelken. Nelken particularly teaches that presenting a visual response (i.e. suggested responses) to such a query includes obtaining one or more visual responses satisfying the response condition (i.e. that satisfy a predetermined threshold level), wherein the one or more visual responses satisfying the response condition include: the one or more visual responses having a matching degree (i.e. a “match score”) with the first input information greater than a first matching threshold (see e.g. paragraphs 0011, 0029, 0032-0034 and 0037-0038). Additionally, Nelken suggests that in response to a plurality of visual responses satisfying the response condition (i.e. having a match score greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold level) being obtained, the visual response output for the first input information includes: (i) outputting a visual response list window (i.e. a resource page), and presenting respective identification information of the plurality of visual responses in the visual information viewing window; and (ii) in response to a selection trigger operation on identification information of one of the plurality of visual responses, presenting the one of the plurality of visual responses in the visual information viewing window (see e.g. paragraphs 0038-0039). Like noted above, Hansen similarly teaches presenting a selected visual response in a visual information viewing window (e.g. chat window) (see e.g. column 3, lines 13-22; and column 6, lines 1-16). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 3.
As per claim 4, Hansen further teaches: (i) obtaining second input information in response to an interactive operation for the visual response (e.g. obtaining selection of a button to be transferred to a customer service representative); and (ii) executing a processing rule (e.g. transferring the user to a customer service representative) corresponding to the second input information, and processing a response content of the currently output visual response (e.g. sending the customer service representative information on the digital exchange the customer engaged in in the chat window) (see e.g. column 6, lines 17-38). Nelken provides a similar teaching (see e.g. paragraph 0041). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 4.
As per claim 5, Hansen further teaches that obtaining the second input information in response to the interactive operation for the visual response (i.e. selection of the button to be transferred to the customer service representative) includes obtaining an interactive instruction (i.e. an instruction to transfer the user to a customer service representative) for the presented visual response in response to a trigger operation (i.e. a selection operation) on the specified service type switching interface (see e.g. column 6, lines 17-38). Nelken provides a similar teaching (see e.g. paragraph 0041). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 5.
Regarding claim 7, Hansen describes systems, apparatus and methods for improving a user’s on-hold experience (see e.g. column 2, lines 12-32). Like claimed, Hansen particularly teaches:
receiving first input information sent by a terminal and determining a service type to which the first input information belongs (see e.g. column 3, line 23 – column 4, line 19; and FIG. 2: Hansen describes a process in which a call routing server and/or on-hold server of an enterprise (i) receives a call from a user device, (ii) places the call in an on-hold queue, (iii) determines that the call is from a known phone number, (iv) sends a push notification to the user device to open an application or website thereon, (v) receives and verifies authentication credentials of the calling user, and then (vi) directs the application or website to open a chat window on the user device. Hansen discloses that the on-hold server then determines the intent of the call using information received via the chat window, for example by receiving a user selection of an option displayed to the user via the chat window – see e.g. column 4, lines 30-45. The information received via the chat window and indicating the intent of the call is considered “first input information” like claimed. Hansen discloses that the determined intent of the call can later be used to identify one or more customer service representatives to provide assistance to the user – see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27. Accordingly, the determined intent is indicative of a service type to which the first input information belongs.);
obtaining visual guidance information for the first input information in response to detecting the first input information being in a queuing state, the visual guidance information being used to indicate a visual response mode (see e.g. column 4, line 59 – column 5, line 13; and column 6, lines 1-16: Hansen discloses that if no customer service representative is available to take the user’s call, the on-hold server offers one or more digital options through the chat window, wherein the one or more options are tailored based on the intent of the call. Specifically, one or more of the options are an attempt to electronically resolve the user’s issues as indicated by the intent of the call – see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16. The one or more options output to the user via the chat window are considered “visual guidance information” like claimed, wherein the one or more options are generated when the first input information is in a queuing state, i.e. input when the user is on-hold. The one or more options are further considered indicative of a visual response mode, as they are selectable to present a visual response that attempts to electronically resolve the user’s issues without involving a customer service representative – see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16.);
sending the visual guidance information to the terminal (see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16: the one or more options are understandably sent to the user device so as to be displayed in a chat window.); and
feeding back a visual response for the first input information in response to receiving trigger information for the visual guidance information, wherein the visual response is presented in a visual information viewing window (see e.g. column 16, lines 1-16: Hansen suggests that the user can select one of the options in the chat window to be presented with corresponding visual information to resolve his or her issues. The presented information is considered a visual response for the first input information based on the visual response mode, and is output in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information, i.e. in response to a selection operation on one of the options. The chat window can be considered a visual information viewing window like claimed.).
Accordingly, Hansen teaches a visual interaction method similar to that of claim 7, but does not explicitly teach performing semantic recognition on the first input information to determine the service type to which the first input information belongs, or receiving a query request for the first input information like claimed. Hansen also does not explicitly disclose that response text information obtained by semantic analysis of information content of the visual response is further sent to be synchronously displayed in the visual information viewing window, as is further required by claim 7. Moreover, while Hansen suggests that a live agent can be selected to assist the user from a team corresponding to the service type (i.e. intent) determined from the first input information (see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27), Hansen does not explicitly disclose that the visual information viewing window includes a response content save interface and a specified service type switching interface, wherein a display state of the specified service type switching interface is updated in response to the first input information switching from the queuing state to a processing state, and whereby a service response page is fed back in response to receiving switch trigger information for specified service type switching when the first input information is in the processing state, the service response page being associated with a communication link to the live agent corresponding to the first input information, as is further required by claim 7.
Nelken nevertheless teaches enabling a customer to enter a natural language query that is provided to an organization, which then responds to the query (see e.g. paragraphs 0003-0007 and 0010). That is, like claimed, Nelken teaches: (i) receiving a query request for first input information (i.e. a natural language query); (ii) performing semantic recognition on the first input information to determine a service type (e.g. a concept and/or category) to which the first input information belongs (i.e. linguistically analyzing the query to extract concepts therefrom, and matching the query to one or more pre-defined categories using the extracted concepts); (iii) obtaining and sending visual guidance information (i.e. suggested responses) for the first input information in response to the query request for the first input information (i.e. in response to sending the natural language query and optionally other metadata to a server); and (iv) feeding back a visual response for the first input information in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information (e.g. in response to selecting a link of a suggested response) (see e.g. paragraphs 0010-0011, 0026, 0028, 0031-0035, and 0038-0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen and Nelken before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input information belongs, and whereby the visual guidance information for the first input information is obtained and sent (i.e. when the first input information is in the queuing state) in response to the query request for the first input information. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable customers to more naturally communicate with an organization or enterprise, as is evident from Nelken (see e.g. paragraph 0028).
Mantha generally teaches enabling a user to locally save displayed content (i.e. a web page) via a response content save interface (see e.g. column 1, line 62 – column 2, line 21; column 8, line 15 – column 9, line 15; and FIGS. 5A-D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken and Mantha before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen and Nelken so as to include in the visual information viewing window a response content save interface like taught by Mantha. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to locally save the content so that it can be later accessed and displayed, as is evident from Mantha (see e.g. column 1, lines 41-65; and column 8, line 15 – column 9, line 15).
Shirey generally describes a computer-implemented for providing topic-based navigation, wherein a semantic analysis is performed on received video content to identify topics within the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018 and 0025-0027). When the video is later played, e.g. within a web page, textual information (e.g. a table of contents) indicating the topics identified by the semantic analysis is sent to be displayed synchronously with the video, and can be used to navigate to corresponding portions of the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018, 0031, 0036, 0038 and 0042-0043, and FIG. 7).
As noted above, Hansen teaches outputting a visual information viewing window and presenting a visual response in the visual information viewing window. Hansen further teaches that the visual response can comprise video, inter alia (see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha and Shirey before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken and Mantha so as to send text information (e.g. topics within a table of contents) like taught by Shirey, which is obtained by semantic analysis of such video (i.e. information content of the visual response), to be synchronously displayed in the visual information viewing window. Such text information is considered “response text information” like claimed. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to efficiently identify and navigate to relevant portions of the video, as is taught by Shirey (see e.g. paragraphs 0005-0006 and 0019).
Mairs generally teaches initiating an availability alerting service in response to the non-completion of an initial call from a calling party to a called party (e.g. because the called party is busy), whereby the availability alerting service transmits availability update messages to alert the calling party when the called party (e.g. a contact center) is available to accept an incoming call (see e.g. column 2, lines 14-43; column 4, line 43 – column 5, line 33; and column 14, line 15 – column 15, line 12). Regarding the claimed invention, Mairs particularly teaches that the availability alerting service provides for display of an indicator, such as an icon, on the display of the calling party, wherein the display state of the indicator is updated in response to the called party changing to an available state, and wherein a communication link (i.e. a call) with the called party is initiated in response to a trigger operation on the indicator when the called party is in an available state (see e.g. column 5, lines 39-57; column 19, line 52 – column 20, line 10; and column 20, line 31 – column 21, line 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha and Shirey so as to also display in the visual information viewing window an indicator like taught by Mairs, wherein a display state of the indicator is updated in response to the called party (i.e. a customer service representative) becoming available (i.e. in response to the first input information switching from the queuing state to a processing state), and wherein a service (i.e. a call) is initiated in response to receiving a trigger operation on the indicator when the called party is available (i.e. when the first input information is in the processing state), the service being associated with a communication link to a live agent (i.e. a call to a live agent corresponding to the first input information). Such an indicator is considered a “specified service type switching interface” like claimed. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would aid the calling party in deciding upon an appropriate time to contact a recipient that is convenient for both parties, as is taught by Mairs (see e.g. column 20, lines 5-9). Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs are thus considered to teach a method similar to that of claim 7, but do not explicitly teach feeding back a service response page in response to receiving switch trigger information for specified service type switching (e.g. the trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface) when the first input information is in the processing state, wherein the service response page is associated with the communication link to the live agent corresponding to the first input information, as is required by claim 7.
Stepanian nevertheless provides such a teaching. Particularly, similar to Hansen, Stepanian teaches enabling a user to perform troubleshooting while waiting in a queue to be connected to a human support agent (see e.g. column 7, lines 20-45). Regarding the claimed invention, Stepanian further teaches displaying a specified service type switching interface (e.g. a “start call” button), and outputting a service response page (e.g. an image of a support person, pictures illustrating aspects of a consumer device, and/or textual instructions) in response to receiving switch trigger information for specified service type switching (i.e. receiving a switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface), the service response page being associated with a communication link to a live agent (see e.g. column 7, lines 12-19; column 13, line 65 – column 14, line 32; and FIGS. 14A, 14B and 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs so as to further feed back a service response page in response to receiving the switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface (i.e. in response to receiving switch trigger information for specified service type switching when the first information is in the processing state), wherein the service response page is associated with the communication link to the live agent (i.e. corresponding to the first input information), like taught by Stepanian. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a service response page because it can provide useful information to the user during his or her call with a human support agent, as is suggested by Stepanian (see e.g. column 7, lines 12-19; and column 13, line 65 – column 14, line 32). Hansen suggests that the live agent can be selected to assist the user from a team corresponding to the service type (i.e. intent) determined from the first input information (see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27). As noted above, it would have been obvious to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input belongs. It thereby follows that the live agent would be selected from a team corresponding to the service type determined from the first input information by the semantic recognition. Accordingly, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a visual interaction method like that of claim 7.
As per claim 8, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Hansen so that the first input information additionally or alternatively can include a natural language query like taught by Nelken. Nelken particularly teaches that obtaining visual guidance information for such input information includes: (i) filtering a plurality of pending visual responses (i.e. categories and corresponding suggested responses) belonging to the service type from a plurality of pre-stored visual responses; (ii) obtaining a matching degree (i.e. a “match score”) between each of the plurality of pending visual responses and the first input information; and (iii) determining that there are pending visual responses with the matching degree greater than a first matching threshold, and generating the visual guidance information (i.e. suggested responses) for the first input information based on the determined pending visual responses (see e.g. paragraphs 0030, 0032-0034, and 0037-0038). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a method like that of claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, Hansen describes systems, apparatus and methods for improving a user’s on-hold experience (see e.g. column 2, lines 12-32). Like claimed, Hansen particularly teaches:
obtaining first input information (see e.g. column 3, line 23 – column 4, line 19; and FIG. 2: Hansen describes a process in which a call routing server and/or on-hold server of an enterprise (i) receives a call from a user device, (ii) places the call in an on-hold queue, (iii) determines that the call is from a known phone number, (iv) sends a push notification to the user device to open an application or website thereon, (v) receives and verifies authentication credentials of the calling user, and then (vi) directs the application or website to open a chat window on the user device. Hansen discloses that the on-hold server then determines the intent of the call using information received via the chat window, for example by receiving a user selection of an option displayed to the user via the chat window – see e.g. column 4, lines 30-45. The information received via the chat window and indicating the intent of the call is considered “first input information” like claimed.);
outputting visual guidance information for the first input information, the visual guidance information being generated when the first input information is in a queuing state and is used to indicate a visual response mode (see e.g. column 4, line 59 – column 5, line 13; and column 6, lines 1-16: Hansen discloses that if no customer service representative is available to take the user’s call, the on-hold server offers one or more digital options through the chat window, wherein the one or more options are tailored based on the intent of the call. Specifically, one or more of the options are an attempt to electronically resolve the user’s issues as indicated by the intent of the call – see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16. The one or more options output to the user via the chat window are considered “visual guidance information” like claimed, wherein the one or more options are generated when the first input information is in a queuing state, i.e. input when the user is on-hold. The one or more options are further considered indicative of a visual response mode, as they are selectable to present a visual response that attempts to electronically resolve the user’s issues without involving a customer service representative – see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16.); and
outputting a visual response for the first input information based on the visual response mode in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information, wherein outputting the visual response includes outputting a visual information viewing window and presenting the visual response in the visual information viewing window (see e.g. column 16, lines 1-16: Hansen suggests that the user can select one of the options in the chat window to be presented with corresponding visual information to resolve his or her issues. The presented information is considered a visual response for the first input information based on the visual response mode, and is output in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information, i.e. in response to a selection operation on one of the options. The chat window in which the visual information is presented can be considered a visual information viewing window like claimed.).
Hansen discloses that such teachings can be implemented via one or more software modules executed by a processor of a device (see e.g. column 8, line 39 – column 9, line 10). Such a device implementing the above-described teachings of Hansen is considered a visual interaction device similar to that of claim 9. Hansen, however, does not explicitly teach performing semantic recognition on the first input information to determine the service type to which the first input information belongs, or that the visual guidance information is output in response to a query request for the first input information, as is required by claim 9. Hansen also does not explicitly disclose that the visual information viewing window synchronously displays response text information obtained by semantic analysis of information content of the visual response, wherein the visual information viewing window includes a response content save interface and a specified service type switching interface, and whereby in response to a trigger operation on the response content save interface, to-be-saved identification information of the visual response including an address of the visual response is obtained, as is further required by claim 9. In addition, while Hansen suggests that a live agent can be selected to assist the user from a team corresponding to the service type (i.e. intent) determined from the first input information (see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27), Hansen does not explicitly teach updating a display state of the specified service type switching interface in response to the first input information switching from the queuing state to a processing state, and outputting a service response page in response to a switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface when the first input information is in the processing state, wherein the service response page is associated with a communication link to the live agent corresponding to the first input information, as is further required by claim 9.
Nelken nevertheless teaches enabling a customer to enter a natural language query that is provided to an organization, which then responds to the query (see e.g. paragraphs 0003-0007 and 0010). Particularly, like claimed, Nelken teaches: (i) obtaining first input information (i.e. a natural language query); (ii) performing semantic recognition on the first input information to determine a service type (e.g. a concept and/or category) to which the first input information belongs (i.e. linguistically analyzing the query to extract concepts therefrom, and matching the query to one or more pre-defined categories using the extracted concepts); (iii) outputting visual guidance information (i.e. suggested responses) for the first input information in response to a query request for the first input information (i.e. in response to sending the natural language query and optionally other metadata to a server); and (iv) outputting a visual response for the first input information in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information (e.g. in response to selecting a link of a suggested response) (see e.g. paragraphs 0010-0011, 0024, 0026, 0028, 0031-0035, and 0038-0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen and Nelken before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input information belongs, and whereby the visual guidance information for the first input information is output in response to a query request for the first input information. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable customers to more naturally communicate with an organization or enterprise, as is evident from Nelken (see e.g. paragraph 0028).
Mantha generally teaches enabling a user to locally save displayed content (i.e. a web page) via a response content save interface (see e.g. column 1, line 62 – column 2, line 21; column 8, line 15 – column 9, line 15; and FIGS. 5A-D). Mantha further suggests that, in response to a trigger operation on the response content save interface, to-be-saved identification information of the displayed content including an address of the displayed content is obtained (see e.g. column 2, lines 11-62; column 10, lines 9-39; and column 11, lines 41-65: Mantha discloses that locally saving a copy of a displayed web page entails: (i) copying the base HTML document of the web page to local storage and establishing a pointer to the locally-stored page; (ii) creating a list of hypertext references/URLs within the original page, whereby the references/URLs that point to files such as images are identified and used to retrieve and store the corresponding files in local storage; (iii) creating a second list comprising references/URLs to the local storage for the locally-stored files; and (iv) within the locally-stored HTML page, substituting the references/URLs to the locally-stored files for the original references/URLs. The pointer to the locally-stored HTML page, the reference/URL within the original page to a file, and/or the reference/URL to the locally-stored file can be considered “to-be-saved identification information” that includes an address of the displayed content like claimed. Moreover, Mantha suggests that the web page can alternatively be stored via a bookmark – see e.g. column 8, lines 52-61; and FIGS. 5C. Such a bookmark to the web page can additionally or alternatively be considered “to-be-saved identification information” that comprises an address of the webpage.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken and Mantha before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device taught by Hansen and Nelken so as to display in the visual information viewing window a response content save interface like taught by Mantha, whereby in response to a trigger operation on the response content save interface, to-be-saved identification information of the displayed content (i.e. the visual response) including an address of the displayed content is obtained. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to save the content so that it can be later accessed and displayed, as is evident from Mantha (see e.g. column 1, lines 41-65; and column 8, line 15 – column 9, line 15).
Shirey generally describes a computer-implemented for providing topic-based navigation, wherein a semantic analysis is performed on received video content to identify topics within the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018 and 0025-0027). When the video is later played, e.g. within a web page, textual information (e.g. a table of contents) indicating the topics identified by the semantic analysis is displayed synchronously with the video and can be used to navigate to corresponding portions of the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018, 0031, 0036, 0038 and 0042-0043, and FIG. 7).
As noted above, Hansen teaches outputting a visual information viewing window and presenting a visual response in the visual information viewing window. Hansen further teaches that the visual response can comprise video, inter alia (see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha and Shirey before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device taught by Hansen, Nelken and Mantha so as to synchronously display, in the visual information viewing window, text information (e.g. topics within a table of contents) like taught by Shirey, which is obtained by semantic analysis of the video (i.e. of information content of the visual response). Such text information is considered “response text information” like claimed. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the user to efficiently identify and navigate to relevant portions of the video, as is taught by Shirey (see e.g. paragraphs 0005-0006 and 0019).
Mairs generally teaches initiating an availability alerting service in response to the non-completion of an initial call from a calling party to a called party (e.g. because the called party is busy), whereby the availability alerting service transmits availability update messages to alert the calling party when the called party (e.g. a contact center) is available to accept an incoming call (see e.g. column 2, lines 14-43; column 4, line 43 – column 5, line 33; and column 14, line 15 – column 15, line 12). Regarding the claimed invention, Mairs particularly teaches that the availability alerting service provides for display of an indicator, such as an icon, on the display of the calling party, wherein the display state of the indicator is updated in response to the called party changing to an available state, and wherein a communication link (i.e. a call) with the called party is initiated in response to a trigger operation on the indicator when the called party is in an available state (see e.g. column 5, lines 39-57; column 19, line 52 – column 20, line 10; and column 20, line 31 – column 21, line 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha and Shirey so as to also display in the visual information viewing window an indicator like taught by Mairs, wherein a display state of the indicator is updated in response to the called party (i.e. a customer service representative) becoming available (i.e. in response to the first input information switching from the queuing state to a processing state), and wherein a service (i.e. a call) is initiated in response to a trigger operation on the indicator when the called party is available (i.e. when the first input information is in the processing state), the service being associated with a communication link (i.e. a call to a live agent corresponding to the first input information). Such an indicator is considered a “specified service type switching interface” like claimed. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would aid the calling party in deciding upon an appropriate time to contact a recipient that is convenient for both parties, as is taught by Mairs (see e.g. column 20, lines 5-9). Accordingly, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs are considered to teach a device similar to that of claim 9, but do not explicitly teach outputting a service response page in response to the switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface, wherein the service response page is associated with the communication link to the live agent corresponding to the first input information, as is required by claim 9.
Stepanian nevertheless provides such a teaching. Particularly, similar to Hansen, Stepanian teaches enabling a user to perform troubleshooting while waiting in a queue to be connected to a human support agent (see e.g. column 7, lines 20-45). Regarding the claimed invention, Stepanian further teaches displaying a specified service type switching interface (e.g. a “start call” button), and outputting a service response page (e.g. an image of a support person, pictures illustrating aspects of a consumer device, and/or textual instructions) in response to a switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface, the service response page being associated with a communication link to a live agent (see e.g. column 7, lines 12-19; column 13, line 65 – column 14, line 32; and FIGS. 14A, 14B and 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey and Mairs so as to further output a service response page in response to the switch trigger operation on the specified service type switching interface, wherein the service response page is associated with the communication link to the live agent (i.e. corresponding to the first input information), like taught by Stepanian. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a service response page because it can provide useful information to the user during his or her call with a human support agent, as is suggested by Stepanian (see e.g. column 7, lines 12-19; and column 13, line 65 – column 14, line 32). Hansen suggests that the live agent can be selected to assist the user from a team corresponding to the service type (i.e. intent) determined from the first input information (see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27). As noted above, it would have been obvious to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input belongs. It thereby follows that the live agent would be selected from a team corresponding to the service type determined from the first input information by the semantic recognition. Accordingly, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a visual interaction device like that of claim 9.
As per claim 10, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the device taught by Hansen so that the first input information additionally or alternatively can include a natural language query like taught by Nelken. Nelken particularly teaches that presenting a visual response (i.e. suggested responses) to such a query includes presenting a visual response whose matching degree (i.e. “match score”) with the first input information satisfies a response condition (e.g. satisfies a predetermined threshold level) (see e.g. paragraphs 0011, 0029, 0032-0034 and 0037-0038). Accordingly, it follows that with the combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, the visual response presented in the visual information viewing window would satisfy a response condition. The above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is thus further considered to teach a device like that of claim 10.
As per claim 11, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the device taught by Hansen such that the first input information additionally or alternatively can include a natural language query like taught by Nelken. Nelken particularly teaches that presenting a visual response (i.e. suggested responses) to such a query includes obtaining one or more visual responses satisfying the response condition (i.e. that satisfy a predetermined threshold level), wherein the one or more visual responses satisfying the response condition include the one or more visual responses having a matching degree (i.e. a “match score”) with the first input information greater than a first matching threshold (see e.g. paragraphs 0011, 0029, 0032-0034 and 0037-0038). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a device like that of claim 11.
As per claim 12, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the device taught by Hansen such that the first input information additionally or alternatively can include a natural language query like taught by Nelken. Nelken suggests that in response to a plurality of visual responses satisfying the response condition (i.e. having a match score greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold level) being obtained, the visual response output for the first input information includes: (i) outputting a visual response list window (i.e. a resource page), and presenting respective identification information of the plurality of visual responses in the visual information viewing window; and (ii) in response to a selection trigger operation on identification information of one of the plurality of visual responses, presenting the one of the plurality of visual responses in the visual information viewing window (see e.g. paragraphs 0038-0039). Like noted above, Hansen similarly teaches presenting a selected visual response in a visual information viewing window (e.g. chat window) (see e.g. column 3, lines 13-22; and column 6, lines 1-16). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a device like that of claim 12.
As per claim 13, Hansen further teaches that the device also: (i) obtains second input information in response to an interactive operation for the visual response (e.g. obtain selection of a button to be transferred to a customer service representative); and (ii) executes a processing rule (e.g. transfers the user to a customer service representative) corresponding to the second input information, and processes a response content of the currently output visual response (e.g. sends the customer service representative information on the digital exchange the customer engaged in in the chat window) (see e.g. column 6, lines 17-38; and column 8, line 39 – column 9, line 10). Nelken provides a similar teaching (see e.g. paragraph 0041). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a device like that of claim 13.
As per claim 15, Hansen further teaches that the device obtains an interactive instruction (i.e. an instruction to transfer the user to a customer service representative) for the presented visual response in response to a trigger operation (i.e. a selection operation) on a specified service type switching interface (see e.g. column 6, lines 17-38; and column 8, line 39 – column 9, line 10). Nelken provides a similar teaching (see e.g. paragraph 0041). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a device like that of claim 15.
As per claim 18, Hansen further teaches that the visual guidance information is generated by a service server and sent by the service server (see e.g. column 4, line 59 – column 5, line 13; and column 6, lines 1-16: like noted above, Hansen discloses that if no customer service representative is available to take the user’s call, a server offers one or more digital options through the chat window, wherein the one or more options are tailored based on the intent of the call. Specifically, one or more of the options are an attempt to electronically resolve the user’s issues as indicated by the intent of the call – see e.g. column 6, lines 1-16. The server is considered a “service server” like claimed, which generates and sends visual guidance information, i.e. the one or more options.). Accordingly, the above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is further considered to teach a device like that of claim 18.
As per claim 20, it would have been obvious, as is described above, to modify the method taught by Hansen so that the first input information additionally or alternatively can include a natural language query like taught by Nelken. Nelken particularly teaches that presenting a visual response (i.e. suggested responses) to such a query includes presenting a visual response whose matching degree (i.e. “match score”) with the first input information satisfies a response condition, and wherein the visual response satisfying the response condition includes the visual response having a highest matching degree with the first input information among a plurality of pending visual responses (see e.g. paragraphs 0011, 0029, 0032-0034, 0037-0038 and 0046). The above-described combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian is thus further considered to teach a method like that of claim 20.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, which is described above, and also over U.S. Patent No. 7,336,779 to Boyer et al. (“Boyer”).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian teach a method like that of claim 1 and a device like that of claim 9, as is described above, which entail outputting visual guidance information (selectable options) for first input information, and outputting a visual response for the first input information in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information. Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, however, do not explicitly disclose that outputting the visual guidance information includes outputting first live broadcast room information of a first live broadcast room that is in a live state, and that outputting the visual response for the first input information includes, in response to a trigger operation on the first live broadcast room information, outputting a triggered live broadcast content of the first live broadcast room, the live broadcast content including a response to the first input information, as is required by claims 6 and 17.
Similar to Hansen, Boyer teaches presenting to a user a plurality of options (i.e. visual guidance information like claimed) in response to a request for first input information while the first input information is in a queuing state (i.e. column 3, lines 11-39; column 7, lines 34-50; and column 8, lines 19-56). Like claimed, Boyer particularly teaches that this can include outputting first live broadcast room information of a first live broadcast room that is in a live state (i.e. outputting an option to access a multi-customer session or chat of interest, in which live messages from participants are broadcast and received), wherein in response to a trigger operation on the first live broadcast room information (i.e. a selection of the option), triggered live broadcast content of a first live broadcast room is output (i.e. the user is connected to the multi-customer session or chat of interest), the live broadcast content including a response to the first input information (see e.g. column 2, lines 8-25; column 8, lines 19-56; column 9, lines 13-30; column 10, lines 26-38; and column 11, lines 54-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs, Stepanian and Boyer before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and device taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian so that at least one of the output options (i.e. visual guidance information) includes first live broadcast room information of a first live broadcast room that is in a live state like taught by Boyer, wherein in response to a trigger operation on the first live broadcast room information, triggered live broadcast content of a first live broadcast room is output, the live broadcast content including a response to the first input information. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable the contact center to more efficiently address a plurality of callers’ needs, as is suggested by Boyer (see e.g. column 3, lines 46-63). Accordingly, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs, Stepanian and Boyer are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a visual interaction method like that of claim 6 and a device like that of claim 17.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, which is described above, and also over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0146647 to Ramchandran et al. (“Ramchandran”).
As described above, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian teach a method like that of claim 2, which comprises outputting visual guidance information (selectable options) for first input information, and outputting a visual response for the first input information in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information. Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, however, do not explicitly teach receiving one or more hot visual responses corresponding to one or more hot issues, respectively, and displaying the one or more hot visual responses, wherein an issue having a number of occurrences within a preset period of time greater than a threshold value is determined as the one or more hot issues, as is required by claim 21.
Ramchandran nevertheless teaches receiving one or more hot visual responses corresponding to one or more hot issues (i.e. trending responses), respectively, and displaying the one or more hot visual responses on an agent’s computer, wherein an issue having a number of occurrences within a preset period of time (i.e. a frequency) greater than a threshold value is determined as the one or more hot issues (see e.g. paragraphs 0092-0095).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs, Stepanian and Ramchandran before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian so as to receive one or more hot visual responses corresponding to one or more hot issues, respectively, and displaying the one or more hot visual responses, wherein an issue having a number of occurrences within a preset period of time greater than a threshold value is determined as the one or more hot issues, as is taught by Ramchandran. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would help to provide high quality responses to customers, as is taught by Ramchandran (see e.g. paragraph 0096). Accordingly, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs, Stepanian and Ramchandran are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a visual interaction method like that of claim 21.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, which is described above, and also over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0029342 to Lee et al. (“Lee”).
As described above, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian teach a method like that of claim 1, which comprises outputting visual guidance information (selectable options) for first input information in response to a query request for the first input information, and outputting a visual response in a visual information viewing window in response to a trigger operation on the visual guidance information. Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian, however, do not explicitly teach changing a background color of the visual information viewing window to indicate a change of available service types for the query request, as is required by claim 22.
Lee nevertheless teaches generally teaches changing a background color of a display screen to indicate that a called party has answered a call (see e.g. paragraphs 0006 and 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs, Stepanian and Lee before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs and Stepanian so as to analogously change the background color of the visual information viewing window to indicate that the called party has answered the call as is taught by Lee (which would thus indicate a change of available service types for the query request to an in-person service type). It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because can give the caller a more satisfying feeling, as is taught by Lee (see e.g. paragraph 0006). Accordingly, Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Shirey, Mairs, Stepanian and Lee are considered to teach, to one of ordinary skill in the art, a visual interaction method like that of claim 22.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s amendments to claims 1 and 7-9. Regarding the pending claims, the Applicant argues that Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Mairs and Stepanian fail to teach or suggest “synchronously displaying, in the visual information viewing window, response text information obtained by semantic analysis of information content of the visual response,” as is now recited in claim 1.
These arguments have been considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above. Particularly, like described above, Shirey teaches a computer-implemented for providing topic-based navigation, wherein a semantic analysis is performed on received video content to identify topics within the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018 and 0025-0027). When the video is later played, e.g. within a web page, textual information (e.g. a table of contents) indicating the topics identified by the semantic analysis is displayed synchronously with the video and can be used to navigate to corresponding portions of the video (see e.g. paragraphs 0018, 0031, 0036, 0038 and 0042-0043, and FIG. 7). Shirey thus teaches synchronously displaying, in a visual information viewing window, response text information (e.g. topics within a table of contents) that is obtained by semantic analysis of information content of a visual response (i.e. of the video).
Further regarding the pending claims, the Applicant argues that Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Mairs and/or Stepanian fail to teach or suggest the limitation in claim 1 reciting, “in response to a trigger operation on the response content save interface, to-be-saved identification information of the visual response including an address of the visual response is obtained.”
The Examiner, however, respectfully disagrees and submits that Mantha provides such a teaching. In particular, like described above, Mantha generally teaches enabling a user to locally save displayed content (i.e. a web page) via a response content save interface (see e.g. column 1, line 62 – column 2, line 21; column 8, line 15 – column 9, line 15; and FIGS. 5A-D). Mantha discloses that locally saving a copy of a displayed web page entails: (i) copying the base HTML document of the web page to local storage and establishing a pointer to the locally-stored web page; (ii) creating a list of the hypertext references/URLs within the web page, whereby the references/URLs that point to files such as images are identified and used to retrieve and store the corresponding files in local storage; (iii) creating a second list comprising references/URLs to the local storage for the locally-stored files; and (iv) within the locally-stored HTML page, substituting the references/URLs to the locally-stored files for the original references/URLs (see e.g. column 2, lines 11-62; column 10, lines 9-39; and column 11, lines 41-65). The pointer to the locally-stored HTML page, a reference/URL within the original page to a file, and/or a reference/URL to the locally-stored file can be considered “to-be-saved identification information” that includes an address of the displayed content like claimed. Moreover, Mantha suggests that the web page can alternatively be stored via a bookmark (see e.g. column 8, lines 52-61; and FIGS. 5C). Such a bookmark to the web page can additionally or alternatively be considered “to-be-saved identification information” that comprises an address of the webpage. Accordingly, the Examiner respectfully maintains that Mantha teaches, in response to a trigger operation on a response content save interface (i.e. in response to selecting an option to save a web page), to-be-saved identification information of the visual response including an address of the visual response is obtained (e.g. a reference/URL within the original page to a file is obtained).
Further regarding the pending claims, the Applicant argues that Hansen, Nelken, Mantha, Mairs and/or Stepanian fail to teach or suggest the limitation in claim 1 reciting “the live agent being selected from a team corresponding to the service type determined from the first input information by the semantic recognition.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees, and submits that the combination of Hansen and Nelken provides such a teaching. In particular, like noted above, Hansen describes a process in which a call routing server and/or on-hold server of an enterprise (i) receives a call from a user device, (ii) places the call in an on-hold queue, (iii) determines that the call is from a known phone number, (iv) sends a push notification to the user device to open an application or website thereon, (v) receives and verifies authentication credentials of the calling user, and then (vi) directs the application or website to open a chat window on the user device (see e.g. column 3, line 23 – column 4, line 19; and FIG. 2). Hansen discloses that the on-hold server then determines the intent of the call using information received via the chat window, for example, by receiving a user selection of an option displayed to the user via the chat window (see e.g. column 4, lines 30-45). Hansen further suggests that a live agent can be selected to assist the user from a team corresponding to the determined intent (e.g. account security) of the call (see e.g. column 5, lines 13-27). Accordingly, liked noted above, Hansen is considered to teach obtaining first input information (e.g. a user-selected option received via the chat window) and determining a service type (e.g. an intent) to which the first input information belongs, and then selecting a live agent to assist the user from a team corresponding to the service type determined from the first input information.
Nelken generally teaches enabling a customer to enter a natural language query that is provided to an organization, which then responds to the query (see e.g. paragraphs 0003-0007 and 0010). Particularly, like noted above, Nelken teaches: (i) obtaining first input information (i.e. a natural language query); and (ii) performing semantic recognition on the first input information to determine a service type (e.g. a concept and/or category) to which the first input information belongs (i.e. linguistically analyzing the query to extract concepts therefrom, and matching the query to one or more pre-defined categories using the extracted concepts). As further noted above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Hansen and Nelken before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input belongs. It would have been advantageous to one of ordinary skill to utilize such a combination because it would enable customers to more naturally communicate with an organization or enterprise, as is evident from Nelken (see e.g. paragraph 0028).
In summary, Hansen teaches that a live agent can be selected to assist a user from a team corresponding to a service type (i.e. intent) determined from first input information. It would have been obvious to modify the method taught by Hansen such that the first input information can additionally or alternatively include a natural language query like taught by Nelken, whereby semantic recognition is performed on such first input information to determine the service type to which the first input information belongs. It thereby follows that the live agent would be selected from a team corresponding to the service type, which is determined from the first input information by the semantic recognition. Accordingly, the combination of at least Hansen and Nelken is considered to teach, “the live agent being selected from a team corresponding to the service type determined from the first input information by the semantic recognition,” as is claimed.
The Applicant’s arguments have thus been fully considered, but are either moot or non-persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. §1.111(C) to consider these references fully when responding to this action. In particular, the U.S. Patent Application Publication to Jain et al. cited therein teaches synchronously displaying, with a document, text information (e.g. topics) obtained by semantic analysis of information content of the document. The U.S. Patent to Sehrawat et al. cited therein teaches selecting a customer service representative to assist a customer according to a semantic processing of the customer’s input information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAINE T BASOM whose telephone number is (571)272-4044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am - 5:30 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, Matt Ell can be reached at (571)270-3264. 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.
/BTB/
12/22/2025
/MATTHEW ELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2141