DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed on 11/03/2025.
In the instant Amendment, claims 1-2, 5-7, 9-11, and 14-20 have been amended; and claims 1, 10, and 19 are independent claims. Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending. This Action is made Final.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s amendments to the Specification are acknowledged.
The objection to claims 6 and 15 is withdrawn as the claims have been amended.
The rejection of claims 1-7, 9-16, and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) is withdrawn as the claims have been amended.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 10, and 19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection, which were necessitated by amendment.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 2, 11, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim(s) 2, 11, and 20, claims 2, 11, and 20 recite “third part access point”. It is unclear as to what the Applicant regards as a third part access point. In an effort to prevent any inadvertent claim interpretations, appropriate correction is required.
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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim 1-6, 9-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunn et al. (US 2024/0111817; Hereinafter “Hunn”) in view of Li et al. (US 12,014,309; Hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding claim 1, Hunn teaches method for automatically generating a content object in a collaboration system, the method comprising:
performing a docgen process, wherein the docgen process uses one or more template parameters to generate a generated document that is stored in a collaboration system (Hunn: Para. [0069], The document management system 110 receives 730 a request for generating a document template of the document type. The request may be received from a user or may be automatically generated by the document management system 110 based on the current context of execution of the document workflow. For example, the document management system 110 may determine that existing document templates for the document type are not suitable for use in the current context. Para. [0070]-[0072]);
performing, in the collaboration system, analysis on the one or more template parameters (Hunn: Para. [00701], The document management system 110 identifies 740 one or more component types of for the document template type, i.e., component types of components of documents of the document template type. For example, documents of a particular document template type may include specific types of clauses, verifications, and actions. Para. [0071], For each component type of the one or more component types, the document management system 110 selects 750 a version of a document component template of the document component type. The document management system 110 may use the process described in FIG. 5 for selecting a version of the document component template.);
determining that the one or more template parameters refers to one or more third party access points (Hunn: Para. [0033], According to an embodiment, the document workflow orchestration module 125 invokes APIs (application programming interfaces) for executing any of the document management services 145. The document workflow orchestration module 125 may invoke an API remotely for executing a document management service 145 in a workflow engine 175 executing in a cloud platform 170 distinct from the system executing the document management services 145. A workflow engine 175 may include one or more modules of a document management system 110 that execute steps of document workflow. For example, the workflow engine 175 may include one or more document management services 145 that performs actions performed during document workflows such as signing of documents, identity verification, form generation, document generation from metadata, receiving data from a data source, sending a message to a user, or storing a record in a database (e.g., database 135), and so on. Para. [0040], The template portal 210 may support application programming interfaces (APIs) for searching for templates in addition to other functionalities for usage by third party resources and systems. Para. [0047], An example of a document component is a clause. In some embodiments, a clause corresponds to a legal clause, a business clause, financial agreement text, and the like. For example, a given document may include multiple clauses that each correspond to a different header within the document. A clause may be associated with a document component type that characterize content of the clause. Para. [0049], Another example of a document component is an action, for example, sending an email to a user. An action may represent an operation performed on an external system (for example, sending a message, executing an API of an external system, invoking an external service and so on) or an operation performed on a document component (for example, updating a value within a document, updating a text of the document, and so on).)
receiving, responsive to accessing the one or more third party access points, one or more data values corresponding to the one or more template parameters (Hunn: Para. [0049], Another example of a document component is an action, for example, sending an email to a user. An action may represent an operation performed on an external system (for example, sending a message, executing an API of an external system, invoking an external service and so on) or an operation performed on a document component (for example, updating a value within a document, updating a text of the document, and so on). An action specified in a document may represent certain steps of a document workflow performed by the document management system in association with the document. These steps may represent receiving certain data values in the document, sending certain data values to an external system or user, waiting for certain action to get performed for example, waiting to receive an electronic signature from a user, and so on.]).
Hunn does not explicitly teach defining, based on at least the one or more data values, collaboration activities permitted by the collaboration system for the generated document.
In an analogous art, Li teaches defining, based on at least the one or more data values, collaboration activities permitted by the collaboration system for the generated document (Li: Col. 15, Lines 14-24, FIG. 11B illustrates screenshot 1100B of a contract platform to configure a review stage 1120B in a contract, according to some embodiments. Attributes field 422, signer roles and properties field 426, and conditions editor field 428 are as described above. In review stage 1120B, a download field 1130 includes settings such as basic download permissions and group download permissions, and the ability for the user to add download permissions to the workflow 1122. A share document field 1140 includes basic share permissions and group share permissions, and enables the user to add share permissions 1132.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Li with the system and method of Hunn to include defining, based on at least the one or more data values, collaboration activities permitted by the collaboration system for the generated document because this functionality provides for contract platforms enabling parties to elaborate and execute contractual documents remotely (Li: Col. 1, Lines 22-26).
Regarding claim 2, Hunn, in combination with Li, teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a first third part access point of the one or more third party access points correspond to a first third party system and a second third part access point of the one or more third party access points corresponds to a second third party system (Hunn: Para. [0066], The user may be a user of the document management system, for example, a tenant that uses the services of the document management system or the user may be a third party entity that does not use services of the document management system. [user may include third party entity] Para. [0033], The document workflow orchestration module 125 may invoke an API remotely for executing a document management service 145 in a workflow engine 175 executing in a cloud platform 170 distinct from the system executing the document management services. Para. [0036], The user interface (UI) module 120 generates user interfaces allowing users (e.g., the users 130A-B) to interact with the document management system 110. Para. [0040], The template portal 210 allows users to perform actions related to templates including submitting new templates and searching for existing templates. For example, third party entities such as organizations using the document management system 110 [User 130A and 130B may include users of two or more third party entities as such as organizations using the document management system as described in para. [0040]]).
Regarding claim 3, Hunn, in combination with Li, teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the first third party system corresponds to a first entity and the second third party system corresponds to a second entity (Hunn: Para. [0066], The user may be a user of the document management system, for example, a tenant that uses the services of the document management system or the user may be a third party entity that does not use services of the document management system. [user may include third party entity], Para. [0036], The user interface (UI) module 120 generates user interfaces allowing users (e.g., the users 130A-B) to interact with the document management system 110. [User A may include a first third party entity and User B may include a second third party entity]).
Regarding claim 4, Hunn, in combination with Li, teaches the method of claim 2, wherein at least one of the first third party system or the second third party system invokes a workflow of the collaboration system (Hunn: Para. [0033], According to an embodiment, the document workflow orchestration module 125 invokes APIs (application programming interfaces) for executing any of the document management services 145. The document workflow orchestration module 125 may invoke an API remotely for executing a document management service 145 in a workflow engine 175 executing in a cloud platform 170 distinct from the system executing the document management services 145. A workflow engine 175 may include one or more modules of a document management system 110 that execute steps of document workflow. For example, the workflow engine 175 may include one or more document management services 145 that performs actions performed during document workflows such as signing of documents, identity verification, form generation, document generation from metadata, receiving data from a data source, sending a message to a user, or storing a record in a database (e.g., database 135), and so on. Para. [0040], The template portal 210 may support application programming interfaces (APIs) for searching for templates in addition to other functionalities for usage by third party resources and systems.).
Regarding claim 5, Hunn, in combination with Li, teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the workflow of the collaboration system notifies the first or second third party system that the generated document has been generated and stored in the collaboration system (Nunn: Para. [0064], The actions may perform steps of a transaction, for example, storing records in the document management system 110, updating existing records, sending notifications to users, waiting for a user to perform an action such as providing an electronic signature in the document, and so on. Para. [0048], Para. [0047], For example, a clause may specify that if certain conditions are true, certain actions should be performed, for example, generating a record in a database, sending a notification, for example, an email or message to a user, and so on. [transmission of a notification to a first third party entity, User A, and a second third part entity, User B, via message or email after performing a document generation transaction and storing records in accordance with para. [0064]).
Regarding claim 6, Hunn, in combination with Li, teaches the method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the third party access points refers to a universal resource locator (URL) or an application programming interface (API) (Hunn: Para. [0033], According to an embodiment, the document workflow orchestration module 125 invokes APIs (application programming interfaces) for executing any of the document management services 145. The document workflow orchestration module 125 may invoke an API remotely for executing a document management service 145 in a workflow engine 175 executing in a cloud platform 170 distinct from the system executing the document management services 145.).
Regarding claim 9, Hunn, in combination with Li, teaches the method of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the one or more template parameters refers to at least one of, a local data structure, one or more content objects of the collaboration system, or a spreadsheet, or a plug-in, or a database query, or user input (Hunn: Para. [0008], Multiple variables of the document template may be replaced with predicted valued to obtain a document based on the document template. Once the document is generated from the document template, the document management system executes subsequent steps of the document workflow using the document. Para. [0025], For example, the document management system allows users of the party to create, edit, review, and negotiate document content with other users and other parties of the document management system.).
Regarding claims 10-15, Claims 10-15 are rejected under the same rational as claims 1-6, respectively.
Regarding claim 18, Claim 18 is rejected under the same rational as claim 9.
Regarding claims 19-20, Claims 19-20 are rejected under the same rational as claims 1-2, respectively.
Claims 7-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunn et al. (US 2024/0111817; Hereinafter “Hunn”) in view of Li et al. (US 12,014,309; Hereinafter “Li”) in view of Zionpour et al. (US 2023/0055241; Hereinafter “Zionpour”).
Regarding claim 7, Hunn, in combination with Li, teaches the method of claim 1. Hunn, in combination with Li, does not explicitly teach wherein the collaboration activities permitted are defined based on analysis on the generated document by the collaboration system.
In an analogous art, Zionpour teaches wherein the collaboration activities permitted are defined based on analysis on the generated document by the collaboration system (Zionpour: Para. [0701]-[0706], Para. [0701], identifying a change to the variable data element in the electronic word processing document; [0702] upon identification of the change, accessing the external file via the link; [0703] updating the external file to reflect the change to the variable data element in the electronic word processing document; [0704] wherein the current data includes text of the electronic word processing document and the link includes metadata associated with the text; [0705] presenting an interface in the electronic word processing document for enabling designation of document text as the variable data element and for enabling designation of a file as a source of the replacement data; [0706] displaying an interface for enabling permissions to be set on the variable data element and to thereby restrict modifications thereto; Para. [0728]-[0731], Para. [0728], receiving an attempt by a fifth entity to change the first alteration, accessing permissions settings, determining whether the fifth entity possesses a permission enabling change of the first alteration, and upon determination of a change-enabling permission, applying the change to the first alteration; [0729] wherein the determination that the fifth entity possesses the permission is based on a determination that the fifth entity is associated with the first collaborative group; [0730] recognizing the fifth entity as a member of a third collaborative group with permission to change alterations of the first collaborative group, permitting the change to the first alteration, and tagging the change with a third collaborative group indicator;).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Zionpour with the system and method of Hunn and Li to include wherein the collaboration activities permitted are defined based on analysis on the generated document by the collaboration system because this functionality enables various members of a team to cooperate via a common online platform (Zionpour: Para. [0111]).
Regarding claim 8, Hunn teaches the method of claim 1. Hunn does not explicitly teach further comprising redacting a passage from the generated document.
In an analogous art, Zionpour teaches further comprising redacting a passage from the generated document (Zionpour: Para. [0534], Entity 6102 may subsequently share the electronic word processing document with several team members, some of which may be team members in the human resources department. If a team member is not in the human resources department, blocks of text 6110 and 6112 may not be rendered on the display (e.g., omitted from display or redacted) associated with the team member. However, if the team member is in the human resources department, each block of text, including blocks 6110 and 6112 may be rendered on the display associated with the team member.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Zionpour with the system and method of Hunn to include further comprising redacting a passage from the generated document because this functionality provides for enhanced privacy and to prevent sensitive information from being inadvertently exposed (Zionpour: Para. [0534]).
Regarding claim 16, Claim 16 is rejected under the same rational as claim 7.
Regarding claim 17, Claim 17 is rejected under the same rational as claim 8.
Conclusion
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 Nelson Giddins whose telephone number is (571)272-7993. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Linglan Edwards can be reached at (571) 270-5440. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NELSON S. GIDDINS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2408