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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-10 and 11, 13-21 and 23-30 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of copending Application 18107913. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 13-21 and 23-30 are allowable if the above double patenting rejection is addressed.
Reason for Allowance
Independent claims 11 and 21 are allowable because the cited arts of record do not explicitly disclose, teach, or suggest the following limitations content management (in combination with all other features in the claim),
priming a content repository including:
uploading files within the content repository;
saving raw text of the files in primary and tertiary databases;
and saving a plurality of content repository multidimensional vectors based on the uploaded files in a secondary database along with a document ID contained in the primary database;
enabling a user to generate content, thus defining user-generated content; analyzing the user-generated content to identify related content included within the content repository including proactively analyzing the user-generated content to identify related content included within the content repository, proactively analyzing the user-generated content includes monitoring the progress of the generation of user-generated content and routinely analyzing the user-generated content to identify related content included within the content repository, and wherein analyzing the user-generated content includes:
tokenizing the user-generated content into a user-generated content multidimensional vector; and tokenizing the content included within the content repository to provide a plurality of content repository multidimensional vectors;
and comparing the user-generated content multidimensional vector to the plurality of content repository multidimensional vectors; and presenting at least a portion of the related content to the user to assist with generating the user-generated content, including merging and categorizing a plurality of pieces of related content into a hierarchical feed.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chhaya et al (hereinafter Chhaya) US Publication No 20230121711 and in view of Pavlopoulou et al (hereinafter Pavlopoulou) US Patent No 11868380.
As per claim 1, Chhaya teaches:
A computer-implemented method executed on a computing device comprising:
enabling a user to generate content, thus defining user-generated content;
(Fig. 1 and Abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0031], [0042], [0059] and [0062]-[0063]))
analyzing the user-generated content to identify related content included within a content repository including:
tokenizing the user-generated content into a user-generated content multidimensional vector:
(Fig. 1, 3, 6 and Abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0021],[0023], [0031], [0042], [0059] and [0062]-[0063])
tokenizing the content included within the content repository to provide a plurality of content repository multidimensional vectors;
(Fig. 1, 3, 6 and Abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0031], [0042], [0059] and [0062]-[0063])
and comparing the user-generated content multidimensional vector to the plurality of content repository multidimensional vectors;
(Fig. 1, 3 and Abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0031], [0042], [0059] and [0062]-[0063]))
proactively analyzing the user-generated content to identify related content included within the content repository, proactively analyzing the user-generated content includes monitoring the progress of the generation of user-generated content and routinely analyzing the user-generated content to identify related content included within the content repository,
(Fig. 1, 3 and Abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0031], [0042], [0059] and [0062]-[0063])
And presenting at least a portion of the related content to the user to assist with generating the user-generated content, wherein presenting at least a portion of the related content includes presenting related content to the user that affirms the user-generated content.
(Paragraphs [0042]-[0043], [0062]-[0063] and [0066])
Chhaya does not explicitly teach, presenting at least a portion of the related content, including merging and categorizing a plurality of pieces of related content into a hierarchical feed, however in analogous art of content management, Pavlopoulou teaches:
And presenting at least a portion of the related content to the user to assist with generating the user-generated content, including merging and categorizing a plurality of pieces of related content into a hierarchical feed,
(Column 3, lines 63-67, column 4, lines 1-11 and column 9, lines 24-55)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Chhaya and Pavlopoulou by incorporating the teaching of Chhaya into the method of Pavlopoulou. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Chhaya into the system of Pavlopoulou for the purpose of managing content semantic association.
As per claim 3, Chhaya and Pavlopoulou teach:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein analyzing the user- generated content to identify related content included within a content repository includes:
reactively analyzing the user-generated content to identify related content included within a content repository.
(Fig. 1, 3 and Abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0031], [0042], [0059] and [0062]-[0063])( Chhaya)
As per claim 4, Chhaya and Pavlopoulou teach:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein presenting at least a portion of the related content to the user to assist with generating the user-generated content includes:
presenting related content to the user that clarifies a question in the user-generated content.
(Column 8, lines 40-58)( Pavlopoulou)
As per claim 7, Chhaya and Pavlopoulou teach:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1 further comprising:
enabling the user to define a query;
(Fig. 1A and 1B and Abstract column 2, lines 18-36and column 3, lines 16-32)( Pavlopoulou)
processing the query on the content repository;
(Fig. 1A and 1B and Abstract column 2, lines 18-36and column 3, lines 16-32)( Pavlopoulou)
generating a result set;
(Fig. 1A and 1B and Abstract column 2, lines 18-36and column 3, lines 16-32)( Pavlopoulou)
and presenting the result set to the user.
(Fig. 1A and 1B and Abstract column 2, lines 18-36and column 3, lines 16-32)( Pavlopoulou)
As per claim 8, Chhaya and Pavlopoulou teach:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1 wherein enabling a user to generate content, thus defining user-generated content includes:
enabling the user to generate content on a word processor, thus defining user-generated content.
(Fig. 1, 3, 6 and Abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0021],[0023], [0031], [0042], [0059] and [0062]-[0063])(Chhaya)
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chhaya and Pavlopoulou in view of Kim el al (hereinafter Kim) US Publication No 20160085799.
As per claim 6, Chhaya and Pavlopoulou do not explicitly teach presenting related content to the user that corrects the user-generated content, however in analogous art of query processing. Kim teaches:
presenting related content to the user that corrects the user-generated content.
(Paragraphs [0008] and [0114])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Chhaya and Pavlopoulou and Kim by incorporating the teaching of Kim into the method of Chhaya and Pavlopoulou. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Kim into the system of Chhaya and Pavlopoulou for the purpose of augmenting query accuracy.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chhaya and Pavlopoulou in view of Christian Focacci (hereinafter Focacci) US Publication No 20150302097.
As per claim 9, Chhaya and Pavlopoulou do not explicitly teach a non-public content repository, however in analogous art of query processing. Focacci teaches:
content repository includes:
a non-public content repository.
(Paragraph [0032])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Chhaya and Pavlopoulou and Focacci by incorporating the teaching of Focacci into the method of Chhaya and Pavlopoulou. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Focacci into the system of Chhaya and Pavlopoulou for the purpose of optimizing query processing.
As per claim 10, Chhaya and Pavlopoulou do not explicitly teach a public content repository, however in analogous art of query processing. Focacci teaches:
content repository includes:
a public content repository.
(Paragraph [0032])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Chhaya and Pavlopoulou and Focacci by incorporating the teaching of Focacci into the method of Chhaya and Pavlopoulou. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Focacci into the system of Chhaya and Pavlopoulou for the purpose of optimizing query processing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tarek Chbouki whose telephone number is 571-2703154. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached at 571-2701760. 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.
/TAREK CHBOUKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2165 1/10/2026