DETAILED ACTION
A response was received on 17 December 2025. By this response, Claims 1, 4, 6, 7, 11, 14, 16, 17, and 20 have been amended. No claims have been added or canceled. The amendments to the claims were entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the present application.
The substitute specification filed 17 December 2025 was not fully compliant with the provisions 37 CFR 1.121(b)(3) and 1.125(b) and (c) as detailed in the notice of non-compliant amendment mailed 08 April 2026. A corrected substitute specification in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121 and 1.125 was received on 05 June 2026 and has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 17 December 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Sharifi et al, US Patent Application Publication 2023/0153410, and particular reference to amended independent Claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that Sharifi is directed to a server or centralized database that already contains personalized data and discusses methods in which a user may grant permission for various devices or services to access the private information and asserts that this is not analogous to establishing a second communication data for receiving private data (pages 9-10 of the present response, citing Sharifi, paragraphs 0030 and 0042). However, in both Sharifi and the present application, there is private data that is pre-stored in a location (see paragraph 0068 of the present specification and paragraph 0030, for example, of Sharifi). The claims do not limit from where the private data is received over the second communication channel. Sharifi discloses an assistant service which receives voice queries (assistant service 300, see Figures 1A-1C and 3, for example; see also paragraph 0034), where the queries require personal information to resolve (see paragraph 0035). The assistant service in Sharifi clearly corresponds to the claimed “virtual assistant cloud service” and the personal information in Sharifi corresponds to the claimed “private data” (see also Sharifi, paragraph 0029). Sharifi further discloses the profile service providing the personal information to the assistant service (see paragraph 0041, for example) after establishing a second communication channel (see paragraph 0042, out-of-band channel corresponds to claimed second channel; see also Figures 1C and 3 where information is received from profile service on one channel and the voice query is received via a different channel). Therefore, Sharifi does disclose establishing a second communication channel for receiving private data.
Therefore, for the reasons detailed above, the Examiner maintains the rejections as set forth below.
Drawings
The objection to the drawings for informalities is withdrawn in light of the amended drawings filed.
Specification
The corrected substitute specification filed 05 June 2026 has been entered as noted above. Applicant’s cooperation is again requested in correcting any other errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite is NOT withdrawn because not all issues have been clearly addressed and/or because the amendments have raised new issues, as detailed below.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites determining whether private data is required to resolve the intent of the voice query and if so, establishing a second communication channel and receiving the private data over the second channel. However, the claim does not appear to actually resolve the intent of the voice query. This constitutes an omission of essential subject matter, which renders the scope of the claim indefinite.
Claim 4 recites “the application” in line 6. It is not clear whether this is intended to refer to the application of Claim 1 or the further application in Claim 4, lines 5-6.
Claim 10 recites “a present amount of private data” in line 4. It is not clear what amount this is referring to; for example, it is not clear whether this is intended to refer to a quantity of data that has been received, or that has been requested and/or is required.
Claim 11 recites determining whether private data is required to resolve the intent of the voice query and if so, establishing a second communication channel and receiving the private data over the second channel. However, the claim does not appear to actually resolve the intent of the voice query. This constitutes an omission of essential subject matter, which renders the scope of the claim indefinite.
Claim 14 recites “the application” in line 6. It is not clear whether this is intended to refer to the application of Claim 11 or the further application of Claim 14, lines 5-6.
Claim 20 recites “a present amount of private data” in line 4. It is not clear what amount this is referring to; for example, it is not clear whether this is intended to refer to a quantity of data that has been received, or that has been requested and/or is required.
Claims not explicitly referred to above are rejected due to their dependence on a rejected base claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claims 8 and 18 each recite receiving private data at the application via the second communication channel. However, Claims 1 and 11, from which Claims 8 and 18 depend, respectively, have been amended to require receiving private data at the application over the second communication channel. Therefore, Claims 8 and 18 now fail to further limit the subject matter of Claims 1 and 11 as amended, from which they depend.
Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims to place the claims in proper dependent form, rewrite the claims in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claims comply with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sharifi et al, US Patent Application Publication 2023/0153410.
In reference to Claims 1 and 8, Sharifi discloses a method that includes receiving a voice query at a virtual assistant cloud service (paragraph 0034, for example, where assistant service 300 corresponds to the claimed virtual assistant cloud service); determining an intent of the voice query and selecting an application to resolve the intent (see paragraph 0035); and determining whether private data is required to resolve the intent (see paragraph 0035, where personal information, i.e. private data, is needed to fulfill the query), and if so, establishing a second communication channel for receiving the private data and receiving the private data (paragraph 0030; see also paragraph 0042, out of band channel; see also Figures 1A-1C and 3, where one channel is used by the assistant service 300 to receive the personal information from the profile service 170, and another channel is used to receive the voice query).
In reference to Claims 2 and 3, Sharifi further discloses the second communication channel bypassing the cloud service and a bypass signal (paragraph 0041).
In reference to Claim 4 and 6, Sharifi further discloses that the second channel includes a path dependent on the type of data and between devices and applications (paragraph 0030).
In reference to Claim 5, Sharifi further discloses that the second channel is encrypted (paragraph 0031).
In reference to Claim 7, Sharifi further discloses receiving an indication from a client device that private data is required or other determinations that private data is required (paragraph 0035).
In reference to Claim 9, Sharifi further discloses reverting to the first communication channel (paragraph 0028).
In reference to Claim 10, Sharifi further discloses generating an alert based on the private data (paragraph 0042).
Claims 11-20 are directed to systems corresponding to the functionality of the methods of Claims 1-10, and are rejected by a similar rationale, mutatis mutandis.
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 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 Zachary A Davis whose telephone number is (571)272-3870. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:30pm, Eastern Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Rupal D Dharia can be reached at (571) 272-3880. 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.
/Zachary A. Davis/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2492
Prosecution Insights