DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office action is in response to Applicant's amendment filed on 2/9/2026.
Claim 51-67 and 71-73 are pending. Claim 51-54, 58-61, 65-67 and 72 are amended. Claim 1-50 and 68-70 are cancelled. Claim 51-67 and 71-73 are rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim 51- 52, 54-59 and 61-66 and 71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adler, Mark et al (PGPUB Document No. 20100114944), hereafter, referred to as “Adler”, in view of Garg, Parag et al (US Patent No. 9146893), hereafter, referred to as “Garg”.
Claim 1-50, cancelled.
Regarding claim 51(Currently Amended) Adler teaches A method comprising: receiving, using a computing device, an indication of a natural language input from a user equipment device(Adler, element 704 of Fig. 7 & para 0050 disclose receiving an input /query from user to user device “the user terminal 102 may receive a query from the user via the audio transceiver 112”; para 0054 further discloses that input in natural language “In the natural language understanding approach, the classifier voice interface 202 may apply domain knowledge, grammar, statistical models, and the user's own data (e.g., contact list of names) to develop a more complete interpretation of the query”);
retrieving, using the computing device, one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input(Adler, element 704 of Fig. 7 & para 0050 disclose receiving an input /query from user to user device “the user terminal 102 may receive a query from the user via the audio transceiver 112”; para 0087 discloses retrieval of text items in response to a query such as list of emails “The mail domain-specific voice interface may then cause the user terminal 102 to audibly output “There are fifteen new messages including two urgent emails from Bob sent yesterday night.” This action completes the response to the query”);
and transmitting, using the computing device, the response to the natural language input in the selected response output format on the user equipment device and the one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input for display on the user equipment device(Adler, para 0077 further discloses sending output to users’ device in response to user’s natural language query “The domain-specific voice interface 204 may then audibly generate the top N query responses based on the query response templates 412 and may prompt the user to respond with a speech input that provides a further constraint. For instance, the user terminal 102 may output an audible description of narrower or broader domains and may ask the user to speak a further constraint; para 0097 further discloses that response selection can be audio-visual “the architecture discussed herein may combine graphical and voice interfaces to reduce the amount of information audibly presented if there is large amount of data in the response”).
But Adler does not explicitly teach determining, using the computing device, that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output based at least in part on the determining that the user equipment device is associated with the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, selecting, using the computing device, a response output format from a plurality of response output formats for providing a response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, wherein the plurality of response output formats comprises an audio-only output format and an audio-video output format for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, respectively; based at least in part on the selected response output format: generating the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device in the selected response output format, after the selecting the response output format from the plurality of response output formats for providing the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output,
However, in the same field of endeavor of presenting contents based on device capability Garg teaches determining, using the computing device, that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output based at least in part on the determining that the user equipment device is associated with the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output(Garg, col 16:8-12 discloses determining audio or video output support for user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output”), selecting, using the computing device, a response output format from a plurality of response output formats for providing a response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”),
(Garg, col 5:18-21 discloses audio-only output formatting by stripping the video portion “…..For example, video content 112 may have the video removed during processing and only the audio track associated with the video may be provided in the output content 132 where the destination device 134 lacks a display device”) and an audio-video output format for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, respectively(Garg, col 12:61-66 discloses outputting video based on user device’s support to display “The output hardware 720(1) data is indicative of the media output capabilities of the destination device 134. For example, the output hardware 702(1) data may indicate that the destination device 134(1) has a full-color display which supports 1080p video data at 60 frames per second”);
based at least in part on the selected response output format: generating the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device in the selected response output format, after the selecting the response output format from the plurality of response output formats for providing the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of providing contents to devices based on device capability of Garg into generation of query response of Adler to produce an expected result of providing contents to users which are suitable to users’ device. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to format output to facilitate content delivery(Garg, col 16:8-18).
Regarding Claim 52 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Garg further teaches further comprising: selecting, using the computing device, the audio-only output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise a display (Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”).
Regarding Claim 54 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Liu further teaches further comprising: selecting, using the computing device, the audio-video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device comprises an audio component and a display (Garg, col 12:61-66 discloses outputting video based on user device’s support to display “The output hardware 720(1) data is indicative of the media output capabilities of the destination device 134. For example, the output hardware 702(1) data may indicate that the destination device 134(1) has a full-color display which supports 1080p video data at 60 frames per second”).
Regarding Claim 55 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Adler further teaches wherein the receiving the indication of the natural language input comprises receiving the natural language input through a microphone or a keyboard of the user equipment device (Adler, para 0021 disclose microphone as user input device “The audio transceiver 112 may include a speaker for outputting audio to a user and may include a microphone for receiving an audio input from a user”).
Regarding Claim 56 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Adler further teaches further comprising: identifying a user profile associated with the user equipment device; identifying the response output format that is indicated as preferred by the user profile; and transmitting the response to the natural language input based at least in part on the response output format that is indicated as preferred by the user profile (Adler, para 0045 disclose identification of user’s preferred device and selection of output format accordingly “Storing the context information in the context registry 208 permits different domain-specific voice interface 204 to modify the audio output presented to the user based on a user's desired presentation format or input preferences”; where Liu in para 0035 discloses ).
Regarding Claim 57 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Adler further teaches further comprising: in response to the receiving, identifying a user via a voice recognition technique(Adler, para 0048 discloses a voice recognition technique to recognize an user “the user may assign the classifier voice interface 202 an identity (e.g., the user may assign “N95” as the identity). The user may speak the identity for voice activation of the classifier voice interface 202”);
identifying the response output format that is indicated as preferred by a profile of the identified user; and transmitting the response to the natural language input based at least in part on the response output format that is indicated as preferred by the profile of the identified user(Adler, para 0045 disclose identification of user’s preferred device and selection of output format accordingly “Storing the context information in the context registry 208 permits different domain-specific voice interface 204 to modify the audio output presented to the user based on a user's desired presentation format or input preferences”).
Regarding Claim 71 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Garg further teaches wherein the determining, using the computing device, that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output further comprises: determining that the user equipment device lacks a visual output capability(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses determining if the user device lacks visual output capability “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”).
Regarding claim 58(Currently Amended) Adler teaches A system comprising: input/output circuitry configured to(Adler, Fig. 1 discloses a system for input and output): receive an indication of a natural language input from a user equipment device (Adler, element 704 of Fig. 7 & para 0050 disclose receiving an input /query from user to user device “the user terminal 102 may receive a query from the user via the audio transceiver 112”; para 0054 further discloses that input in natural language “In the natural language understanding approach, the classifier voice interface 202 may apply domain knowledge, grammar, statistical models, and the user's own data (e.g., contact list of names) to develop a more complete interpretation of the query”); control circuitry configured to: retrieve one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input (Adler, element 704 of Fig. 7 & para 0050 disclose receiving an input /query from user to user device “the user terminal 102 may receive a query from the user via the audio transceiver 112”; para 0087 discloses retrieval of text items in response to a query such as list of emails “The mail domain-specific voice interface may then cause the user terminal 102 to audibly output “There are fifteen new messages including two urgent emails from Bob sent yesterday night.” This action completes the response to the query”) ;
and wherein the input/output circuitry is further configured to: transmit the response to the natural language input in the selected response output format on the user equipment device and the one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input for display on the user equipment device(Adler, para 0077 further discloses sending output to users’ device in response to user’s natural language query “The domain-specific voice interface 204 may then audibly generate the top N query responses based on the query response templates 412 and may prompt the user to respond with a speech input that provides a further constraint. For instance, the user terminal 102 may output an audible description of narrower or broader domains and may ask the user to speak a further constraint; para 0097 further discloses that response selection can be audio-visual “the architecture discussed herein may combine graphical and voice interfaces to reduce the amount of information audibly presented if there is large amount of data in the response”).
But Adler does not explicitly teach determine that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output; based at least in part on the determining that the user equipment device is associated with the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output: select a response output format from a plurality of response output formats for providing a response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, wherein the plurality of response output formats comprises an audio-only output format and an audio-video output format for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, respectively; and based at least in part on the selected response output format: generate the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device in the selected response output format, after the selecting the response output format from the plurality of response output formats for providing the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output;
However, in the same field of endeavor of presenting contents based on device capability Garg teaches determine that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output; based at least in part on the determining that the user equipment device is associated with the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output(Garg, col 16:8-12 discloses determining audio or video output support for user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output”): select a response output format from a plurality of response output formats for providing a response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio- visual output(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”), wherein the plurality of response output formats comprises an audio-only output format (Garg, col 5:18-21 discloses audio-only output formatting by stripping the video portion “…..For example, video content 112 may have the video removed during processing and only the audio track associated with the video may be provided in the output content 132 where the destination device 134 lacks a display device”) and an audio-video output format for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, respectively(Garg, col 12:61-66 discloses outputting video based on user device’s support to display “The output hardware 720(1) data is indicative of the media output capabilities of the destination device 134. For example, the output hardware 702(1) data may indicate that the destination device 134(1) has a full-color display which supports 1080p video data at 60 frames per second”); and based at least in part on the selected response output format: generate the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device in the selected response output format, after the selecting the response output format from the plurality of response output formats for providing the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of providing contents to devices based on device capability of Garg into generation of query response of Adler to produce an expected result of providing contents to users which are suitable to users’ device. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to format output to facilitate content delivery(Garg, col 16:8-18).
Regarding Claim 59 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 58 and Garg further teaches wherein the control circuitry is further configured to: select the audio-only output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise a display (Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”).
Regarding Claim 61 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 58 and Garg further teaches wherein the control circuitry is further configured to: select the audio-video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device comprises the audio component and a display (Garg, col 12:61-66 discloses outputting video based on user device’s support to display “The output hardware 720(1) data is indicative of the media output capabilities of the destination device 134. For example, the output hardware 702(1) data may indicate that the destination device 134(1) has a full-color display which supports 1080p video data at 60 frames per second”).
Regarding Claim 62 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 58 and Adler further teaches wherein the input/output circuitry is further configured to receive the indication of the natural language input by receiving the natural language input through a microphone or a keyboard of the user equipment device (Adler, para 0021 disclose microphone as user input device “The audio transceiver 112 may include a speaker for outputting audio to a user and may include a microphone for receiving an audio input from a user”).
Regarding Claim 63 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 58 and Adler further teaches wherein the control circuitry is further configured to: identify a user profile associated with the user equipment device; identify the response output format that is indicated as preferred by the user profile; and wherein the input/output circuitry is further configured to: transmit the response to the natural language input based at least in part on the response output format that is indicated as preferred by the user profile (Adler, para 0045 disclose identification of user’s preferred device and selection of output format accordingly “Storing the context information in the context registry 208 permits different domain-specific voice interface 204 to modify the audio output presented to the user based on a user's desired presentation format or input preferences”).
Regarding Claim 64 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 58 and Adler further teaches wherein the control circuitry is further configured to: in response to the receiving, identify a user via a voice recognition technique (Adler, para 0048 discloses a voice recognition technique to recognize an user “the user may assign the classifier voice interface 202 an identity (e.g., the user may assign “N95” as the identity). The user may speak the identity for voice activation of the classifier voice interface 202”);
identify the response output format that is indicated as preferred by a profile of the identified user; and wherein the input/output circuitry is further configured to: transmit the response to the natural language input based at least in part on the response output format that is indicated as preferred by the profile of the identified user (Adler, para 0045 disclose identification of user’s preferred device and selection of output format accordingly “Storing the context information in the context registry 208 permits different domain-specific voice interface 204 to modify the audio output presented to the user based on a user's desired presentation format or input preferences”).
Regarding claim 65(Currently Amended) Adler teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising(Adler, Fig. 1 discloses a system with storage media): instructions that when executed by control circuitry cause input/output circuitry to: receive an indication of a natural language input from a user equipment device(Adler, element 704 of Fig. 7 & para 0050 disclose receiving an input /query from user to user device “the user terminal 102 may receive a query from the user via the audio transceiver 112”; para 0054 further discloses that input in natural language “In the natural language understanding approach, the classifier voice interface 202 may apply domain knowledge, grammar, statistical models, and the user's own data (e.g., contact list of names) to develop a more complete interpretation of the query”); instructions that when executed by the control circuitry cause the control circuitry to: retrieve one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input(Adler, element 704 of Fig. 7 & para 0050 disclose receiving an input /query from user to user device “the user terminal 102 may receive a query from the user via the audio transceiver 112”; para 0087 discloses retrieval of text items in response to a query such as list of emails “The mail domain-specific voice interface may then cause the user terminal 102 to audibly output “There are fifteen new messages including two urgent emails from Bob sent yesterday night.” This action completes the response to the query”);
and wherein the instructions that when executed by the control circuitry cause the input/output circuitry to: transmit the response to the natural language input in the selected response output format on the user equipment device and the one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input for display on the user equipment device(Adler, para 0077 further discloses sending output to users’ device in response to user’s natural language query “The domain-specific voice interface 204 may then audibly generate the top N query responses based on the query response templates 412 and may prompt the user to respond with a speech input that provides a further constraint. For instance, the user terminal 102 may output an audible description of narrower or broader domains and may ask the user to speak a further constraint; para 0097 further discloses that response selection can be audio-visual “the architecture discussed herein may combine graphical and voice interfaces to reduce the amount of information audibly presented if there is large amount of data in the response””).
But Adler does not explicitly teach determine that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output; based at least in part on the determining that the user equipment device is associated with the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output: select a response output format from a plurality of response output formats for providing a response to the natural language input, on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio- visual output, wherein the plurality of response output formats comprises an audio-only output format and an audio-video output format for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, respectively; and based at least in part on the selected response output format: generate the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device in the selected response output format, after the selecting the response output format from the plurality of response output formats for providing the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output;
However, in the same field of endeavor of presenting contents based on device capability Garg teaches determine that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output; based at least in part on the determining that the user equipment device is associated with the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output(Garg, col 16:8-12 discloses determining audio or video output support for user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output”): select a response output format from a plurality of response output formats for providing a response to the natural language input, on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio- visual output(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”), wherein the plurality of response output formats comprises an audio-only output format (Garg, col 5:18-21 discloses audio-only output formatting by stripping the video portion “…..For example, video content 112 may have the video removed during processing and only the audio track associated with the video may be provided in the output content 132 where the destination device 134 lacks a display device”) and an audio-video output format for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output, respectively(Garg, col 12:61-66 discloses outputting video based on user device’s support to display “The output hardware 720(1) data is indicative of the media output capabilities of the destination device 134. For example, the output hardware 702(1) data may indicate that the destination device 134(1) has a full-color display which supports 1080p video data at 60 frames per second”); and based at least in part on the selected response output format: generate the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device in the selected response output format, after the selecting the response output format from the plurality of response output formats for providing the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of providing contents to devices based on device capability of Garg into generation of query response of Adler to produce an expected result of providing contents to users which are suitable to users’ device. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to format output to facilitate content delivery(Garg, col 16:8-18).
Regarding Claim 66 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 65 and Garg further teaches further comprising instructions that when executed by the control circuitry cause the control circuitry to: select the audio-only output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise a display(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”).
Claim 53, 60 and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adler, Mark et al (PGPUB Document No. 20100114944), hereafter, referred to as “Adler”, in view of Garg, Parag et al (US Patent No. 9146893), hereafter, referred to as “Garg”, in further view of Noguchi, Daisuke et al (PGPUB Document No. 20120215883), hereafter, referred to as “Noguchi”.
Regarding Claim 53 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 but don’t explicitly teach further comprising: selecting, using the computing device, a video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise an audio component.
However, in the same field of endeavor of presenting contents based on device capability Noguchi teaches further comprising: selecting, using the computing device, a video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise an audio component(Noguchi, para 0094 discloses depending on audio and video capability of a device, display-only contents are getting displayed to the device ”the browsing-history-collection-style determining unit 110 determines whether the device type is display-only (S1309). If the device type is display-only, the browsing-history-collection-style determining unit 110 determines that display information is to be delivered as in S1106 (S1310)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of providing contents to devices based on device capability of Noguchi into generation of query response of Adler and Garg to produce an expected result of providing contents to users which are suitable to users’ device. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to deliver user specific contents using patterns determined from users’ historical browsing and contents which are already delivered (Noguchi, para 0011).
Regarding Claim 60 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 58 and but don’t explicitly teach wherein the control circuitry is further configured to: select a video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise an audio component.
However, in the same field of endeavor of presenting contents based on device capability Noguchi teaches wherein the control circuitry is further configured to: select a video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise an audio component (Noguchi, para 0094 discloses depending on audio and video capability of a device, display-only contents are getting displayed to the device ”the browsing-history-collection-style determining unit 110 determines whether the device type is display-only (S1309). If the device type is display-only, the browsing-history-collection-style determining unit 110 determines that display information is to be delivered as in S1106 (S1310)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of providing contents to devices based on device capability of Noguchi into generation of query response of Adler and Garg to produce an expected result of providing contents to users which are suitable to users’ device. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to deliver user specific contents using patterns determined from users’ historical browsing and contents which are already delivered (Noguchi, para 0011).
Regarding Claim 67 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 65 and but don’t explicitly teach further comprising instructions that when executed by the control circuitry cause the control circuitry to: select a video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise an audio component.
However, in the same field of endeavor of presenting contents based on device capability Noguchi teaches further comprising instructions that when executed by the control circuitry cause the control circuitry to: select a video output format in response to determining that the user equipment device does not comprise an audio component(Noguchi, para 0094 discloses depending on audio and video capability of a device, display-only contents are getting displayed to the device ”the browsing-history-collection-style determining unit 110 determines whether the device type is display-only (S1309). If the device type is display-only, the browsing-history-collection-style determining unit 110 determines that display information is to be delivered as in S1106 (S1310)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of providing contents to devices based on device capability of Noguchi into generation of query response of Adler and Garg to produce an expected result of providing contents to users which are suitable to users’ device. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to deliver user specific contents using patterns determined from users’ historical browsing and contents which are already delivered (Noguchi, para 0011).
Claim 68-70, cancelled.
Claim 72 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adler, Mark et al (PGPUB Document No. 20100114944), hereafter, referred to as “Adler”, in view of Garg, Parag et al (US Patent No. 9146893), hereafter, referred to as “Garg”, in further view of Boguraev, Branimir et al (US Patent No.10042921), hereafter, referred to as “Boguraev”.
Regarding Claim 72 (Currently Amended), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Adler but don’t explicitly teach wherein retrieving the one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input comprises parsing the natural language input to generate a search query; and excluding, from the search query, one or more filler terms contained in the natural language input.
However, in the same field of endeavor of natural language query processing Boguraev teaches wherein retrieving the one or more text items corresponding to the natural language input comprises parsing the natural language input to generate a search query, and excluding, from the search query; one or more filler terms contained in the natural language input(Boguraev, claim 1 discloses parsing natural language queries and generating search query “generating multiple dependency parses of the natural language query with a parser device connected to the interface…….. and generating a structured data language query to a database from the entities and relations”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of converting natural language input to queries of Boguraev into generation of query response of Adler and Garg to produce an expected result of generating query statements to be executed on databases. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve the robustness of query generation by using multiple parses(Boguraev, col 3:37-40).
Claim 73 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adler, Mark et al (PGPUB Document No. 20100114944), hereafter, referred to as “Adler”, in view of Garg, Parag et al (US Patent No. 9146893), hereafter, referred to as “Garg”, in further view of Lee; Jin Soo (US Patent No. 7983246), hereafter, referred to as “Lee”.
Regarding Claim 73 (Previously Presented), Adler and Garg teach all the limitation of claim 51 and Adler but don’t explicitly teach and determining that the user equipment device is associated with audio-only output or audio-visual output further comprises(Garg, col 16:8-18 discloses based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”):
But Adler and Garg don’t explicitly teach in a database, capability information for a plurality of user equipment devices accessible via a communications network; accessing the database to retrieve capability information for the respective user equipment device.
However, in the same field of endeavor of accessing device information from database Lee teaches in a database, capability information for a plurality of user equipment devices accessible via a communications network; accessing the database to retrieve capability information for the respective user equipment device(Lee, claim 1 teaches a database having user equipment specification that can be accessed “processing the contents data by executing the received plug-in software, wherein the server retrieves the specification information of the user equipment from database using the user equipment ID uniquely identifying the user equipment in a mobile wireless network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention made to incorporate the feature of accessing device specification of Lee into generation of query response of Adler and Garg to produce an expected result of providing contents to users which are suitable to users’ device. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve the content delivery to user devices by checking the device specification first (Lee, claim 1).
Response to Arguments
I. 35 U.S.C §103
The crux of the applicant’s arguments regarding prior art Garg is “Garg performs post-generation content modification. Garg is performing any processing after receiving input content, that already comprises the video, rather than "based at least in part on the selected response output format, generating a response to the natural language input on the user equipment device in the selected response output format, after
the selecting the response output format from the plurality of response output formats for providing the response to the natural language input on the user equipment device for the determined audio-only output or audio-visual output" (emphasis added), as recited in Applicant's claim 51 as amended. Garg is silent as to generating a response after selecting a response format, where such generated response is "based at least in part on the selected response output format," as expressly required by amended claim 51”.
Applicant’s above mentioned arguments have been fully considered but the examiner respectfully disagrees as Garg in col 16:8-18 discloses that based on audio or video output support for user device selecting output response such as providing audio only response when video is not supported by the user device “the processing may further determine a portion of the content 114 unsupported by the presentation context of the destination device 134. For example, the destination device 134 may lack a display for presenting video output…..132 to comprise the portion of the content 112 supported by the presentation context while discarding the portion of the content unsupported by the presentation context. For example, the output content 132 may comprise only the audio portion of the content 112 and omitting the video portion”.
Therefore, the examiner maintains the rejection to claim 51-67 and 71-73.
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 ABDULLAH A DAUD whose telephone number is (469)295-9283. The examiner can normally be reached M~F: 9:30 am~6:30 pm.
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, Amy Ng can be reached at 571-270-1698. 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.
/ABDULLAH A DAUD/Examiner, Art Unit 2164 /AMY NG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2164
Prosecution Insights