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. Note that claims 4 and 7 are objected to because the limitation of selecting a best-matching personality states “based the analysis,” but it should be “based on the analysis.” Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim s 1, 4, and 7 (as well as all dependent claims) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically, the issues are as follows: For limitation of “analyzing user’s personality and demographic information from audio-visual information gathered by the set of outward-facing cameras and the set of microphones”, it is unclear how this analysis is done. What exactly is being performed in the analysis that results in audio-visual information determining a user’s personality? For the next limitation, since it is not clear what this analysis is, it is unclear how a best-matching personality is selected. For the following limitation, it again states an unbounded analysis based on artificial intelligence to set goal models, but it is unclear how the AI engine is used to select a particular goal model. There is no algorithm disclosed even insofar as how the AI is trained. It is further not disclosed how the particular human experts using non-public and public information, as well as human interaction, characters, conversation, and physiology are even used within the broader contest of the AI engine. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 1, 4, and 7, as well as all dependent claims 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. The claims recite a “best-matching” personality, but it is not clear what a “best” matching personality is. Allowable Subject Matter The present independent claims overcome the prior art of record for the following reasons: The references do not teach: selecting a goal model from a set of goal models that each reflects a different type of assistance to be provided to the one or more users by the virtual companion, wherein the selection of the goal model is based on the input of the one or more users based on the needs of the one or more users after the one or more users enters into the encounter area and analysis of the artificial intelligence engine, wherein the set of goal models are generated from the artificial intelligence with a number of human experts with non-public expertise, wherein non-public expertise comprises knowledge, human interaction, human characters, human conversation, and human physiology. The two closest pieces of prior art are: US20210399911A1 which is directed to systems, apparatus, interfaces, methods, and articles of manufacture are provided for providing information about individuals, such as capabilities in the context of meetings. In various embodiments, data is captured about an individual, such as via feedback from others. Based on the data, individuals may be identified and invited to meetings . US20210400142A1 which is directed to systems, apparatus, interfaces, methods, and articles of manufacture are provided for providing information incorporating additional data feeds, creating common arrangements, and improving performance in a virtual meeting . Neither of these references teach the above-mentioned limitation. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ARYAN E WEISENFELD whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6602 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 9-5 . 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, Angela Ortiz can be reached at 5712721206 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT ARYAN E. WEISENFELD Primary Examiner Art Unit 3689 /ARYAN E WEISENFELD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663