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 .
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, 5-8, 12-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to and abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites a method for speech-based instruction scheduling, comprising:
(a) receiving by a microphone included in an electronic device, a first input speech from a user;
(b) converting by the electronic device, the first input speech into a first text message;
(c) obtaining by the electronic device, first instruction contents of the first text message by parsing the first text message based on preset configuration instructions, wherein the first instruction contents comprise a target instruction object and a target instruction action;
(d) sending, by the electronic device, the first instruction contents to a scheduling object, so that the scheduling object controls the target instruction object to execute the target instruction action based on the first instruction contents;
(e) obtaining instruction configuration information, wherein the instruction configuration information comprises instruction actions, instruction objects and an instruction word list, and the instruction word list comprises a correspondence between text messages, the instruction objects and the instruction actions;
(f) obtaining the preset configuration instructions by configuring the instruction actions, the instruction objects and the instruction word list based on the instruction configuration information: wherein obtaining the first instruction contents of the first text message by parsing the first text message comprises: obtaining the first instruction contents of the first text message by parsing the first text message based on the instruction actions, the instruction objects and the instruction word list in the preset configuration instructions:
(g) updating a preset calibration table based on the preset configuration instructions: and obtaining a third text message by calibrating the first text message based on the updated preset calibration table; wherein obtaining the first instruction contents of the first text message comprises: obtaining the first instruction contents of the third text message by parsing the third text message based on the instruction actions, the instruction objects and the instruction word list in the preset configuration instructions;
(h) wherein obtaining the preset configuration instructions comprises:
obtaining configured instructions by configuring the instruction actions, the instruction objects and the instruction word list;
obtaining a second text message served as a test text message;
obtaining second instruction contents of the second text message by parsing the second text message based on the configured instructions;
sending the second instruction contents to the scheduling object, so that the scheduling object performs a scheduling operation based on the second instruction contents; and
in response to the scheduling operation being an expected scheduling operation corresponding to the second text message, determining the configured instructions as the preset configuration instructions.
Step b can be performed by human as human can receive an audio and write it down (convert to text).
Step c can be performed by human as when the human write the text, it can figure it out from the text what object (for e.g. device ) the message is intended for an what action for e.g. (what needs to be done to the device).
Step d is a post solutional activity as human can turn and on the lights but the lights have to take an action to be on or off- which is a necessary step of an abstract idea.
Step e is a mental step similar to c. Step e can be performed by the human as human can obtain the information related to instruction action, instruction object and instruction word list related to the text.
Step f can be performed by the human by manually configuring the action, object and word list.
Step g can be performed by the human as after the manual configuration human can update the table and manipulate the text based on the updated table.
Step 1: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim falls within any statutory category. See MPEP 2106.03. The claim recites method for scheduling. Thus, the claim is a process which is one of the statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A, Prong One: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim. As discussed above, the broadest reasonable interpretation of steps (b),(c), (e)-(g) is that those steps fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because they cover concepts performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III.
Specifically:
Step (b) includes converting by the electronic device, the first input speech into a first text message which is a mental step because human can listen and write down the audio into text.
Step (c) includes obtaining by the electronic device, first instruction contents of the first text message by parsing the first text message based on preset configuration instructions, wherein the first instruction contents comprise a target instruction object and a target instruction action. Step (c) recites evaluation and judgement as human can evaluate and judge what is target object and the action based on the given text and some preset configuration instruction.
Step (e) includes obtaining instruction configuration information, wherein the instruction configuration information comprises instruction actions, instruction objects and an instruction word list, and the instruction word list comprises a correspondence between text messages, the instruction objects and the instruction actions. Step (e) recites observation, evaluation and judgement as human can find out the instruction action, instruction object and create an instruction word list based on observation.
Step (f) includes obtaining the preset configuration instructions by configuring the instruction actions, the instruction objects and the instruction word list based on the instruction configuration information: wherein obtaining the first instruction contents of the first text message by parsing the first text message comprises: obtaining the first instruction contents of the first text message by parsing the first text message based on the instruction actions, the instruction objects and the instruction word list in the preset configuration instructions: Step (f) recites evaluation and judgement, as human can determine the preset configuration information by parsing the written text and based on obtained preset configuration information. Preset configuration information is a mere database, which can be written in a piece of paper.
Step (g) includes updating a preset calibration table based on the preset configuration instructions: and obtaining a third text message by calibrating the first text message based on the updated preset calibration table; wherein obtaining the first instruction contents of the first text message comprises: obtaining the first instruction contents of the third text message by parsing the third text message based on the instruction actions, the instruction objects and the instruction word list in the preset configuration instructions. Step (g) recites mental activity of observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion, here human can update the table based on the received data and create a third text.
Step (h) includes limitations of obtaining the preset configuration instructions by second text message and parsing it to obtain second instruction contents for the scheduling object which are similar to those steps that are similar to steps b-g above and thus analyzed with similar rationale.
Step 2A, Prong Two: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception or whether the claim is “directed to” the judicial exception. This evaluation is performed by (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d).
The claim recites the additional elements of (a) receiving by a microphone included in an electronic device, a first input speech from a user; (b1) by the electronic device and (d) sending, by the electronic device, the first instruction contents to a scheduling object, so that the scheduling object controls the target instruction object to execute the target instruction action based on the first instruction contents;
The limitation in step (a) is a mere data gathering activity to perform an abstract idea. Step (c) is a post solutional activity of sending the information, a nominal addition to the claim that does not meaningfully limit the claim. The limitation (b1) recites generic computer component and is recited at a high level of generality. In limitation (a), the computer is used as a tool to perform the generic computer function of receiving data. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
In limitations (b) and (c), the computer is used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong One, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Hence, even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. (Step 2A: YES).
Step 2B: This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the recited exception i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. See MPEP 2106.05. As discussed above the claim does not recite any additional element sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, there are no additional element. (step 2B, No). The claim is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 5, the claim further recites receiving a second input speech by the microphone which is similar to step a) in claim 1 and is therefore rejected similarly. For the step of determining that the second input speech is authenticated successfully, a human can listen to the speech and authenticates it.
Regarding claim 6, the human can detect the wake-up word and authenticate such second input speech.
Regarding claim 7, a human can determine when there is a complete sentence, then write it down on a piece of paper, or continue to listen until a complete sentence has been detected by the human.
Regarding claim 8, 12-15 and 19-20, these claims further recite an electronic device and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium with similar limitations as claims 1, 5-7 above, and are therefore rejected similarly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the steps a-g are essentially stating that a human cannot perform those steps; however, the rejection above has outlined as how a human could perform those steps.
Applicant further argues that the parsing algorithm, which could be based on techniques like Named Entity Recognition (NER) or dependency parsing, deconstructs the sentence into tokens or scans them against the instruction word list. However, the claims do not recite what the applicant is arguing. Perhaps, citing the details of the parsing algorithm could improve the claimed language to overcome the abstract idea.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hai Phan whose telephone number is (571) 272-6338. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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.
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.
/HAI PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2654