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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/13/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
This Final Rejection is filed in response to Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment filed 07/31/2026.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 11, 13, 15, 16, and 19 are amended.
In light of the amendments the 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) rejections are respectfully withdrawn.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-19 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Argument 1, Applicant argues in Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment filed 07/31/2026 pg. 9-11, that Li fails to teach the primary claim limitation,
“receiving user input text from a user interface (UI) component of a writing
assistance client associated with a user, the user input text being entered into a text field of the UI component and defining a writing prompt to be used by an
artificial intelligence (AI) writing engine as a basis for generating writing
feedback for the user, wherein the UI component comprises a pop-up window
activated within a content editing application;
generating a call by the data interface comprising the content, the metadata,
and the writing prompt to the AI writing engine;
processing, by a result processing component, the writing feedback from the AI
writing engine, wherein the writing feedback includes information combined from
the user content items; and
providing the writing feedback to the UI component of the writing assistance
client,
wherein the writing feedback is displayed in the pop-up window”.
Response to Argument 1, Applicant’s arguments have been considered however in light of the amendments newly proposed combination of prior art (U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20220229832 “Li”, in light of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20220414317 “Heyns”, and further in light of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20200278949 “Wang”) is applied to updated rejections.
However, the examiner notes that the user may input text into a content creation application that has Autopilot integration for generating intelligent content, wherein the content creation application may be a Word, Excel, or Powerpoint editing application. Wherein the user inputs text into a prompt window in order to retrieve and refine relevant content for display in a context window as part of a preview of the presentation content to be generated and retrieved within a data interface by the AI content generation application Autopilot. While Li implies that the automated intelligent content creation system interface may used with and integrated with numerous content generation applications, Li may not explicitly teach that UI component for generating the writing feedback is displayed in a, “a pop-up window activated within a content editing application; and wherein the writing feedback is displayed in the pop-up window”
This is supported by the following paragraphs of Li:
para. [0032], the components of the intelligent content generation system 100, and specifically the user system design components 135 may be used in conjunction with other components of the content generation application 130 to provide content suggestions from the natural language generation model 125 as well as to provide design and layout suggestion
para. [0033], Fig. 9, “The response content may be displayed at step 335. In some embodiments, the content document is updated with user selected response content and may be displayed via the content generation application 130 (i.e. para. [0034], FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary user interface 400 used to interface with the automated intelligent content creation system …. This particular user interface 400 may be used with a presentation creation application such as MICROSOFT POWERPOINT® such that the user may request a presentation as depicted by the title).
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(s) 1-6, 8-13, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NO. 20220229832 “Li”, in light of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20220414317 “Heyns”, and further in light of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20200278949 “Wang”.
Claim 1:
Li teaches a data processing system comprising: a processor (i.e. para. [0045], Fig. 10, processing system 1020 may comprise processor); and a memory in communication with the processor, the memory comprising executable instructions that, when executed by the processor (i.e. para. [0019], User system 105 may include memory for storing instructions that are executed by a processor), cause the data processing system to perform functions of: receiving user input text from a user interface (UI) component of a writing assistance client associated with a user, the user input text being entered into a text field of the UI component and defining a writing prompt (i.e. para. [0034], Fig. 4, “The user may enter “Introduction to Photosynthesis” as shown in query box 405, indicating the user would like a presentation that provides an introduction to photosynthesis”, wherein the BRI for a text being entered into a text filed encompasses the user input query to the query box) to be used by an artificial intelligence (AI) writing engine as a basis for generating writing feedback for the user (i.e. para. [0023-0024], “the application/service component 110 may send the user query or action to the prompt design component 115. The prompt design component 115 is used to generate a prompt that is appropriate for input to the natural language generation model 125…the components used to perform the actions in flowchart 200 include artificial intelligence such as neural networks, machine learning, AI modelling, and the like”, wherein the BRI for writing feedback encompasses how an artificial intelligence such as neural networks and the like that may perform the flowchart actions of generating a presentation document based on the user query and presenting such feedback to the user), wherein the UI component comprises a editing application (i.e. para. [0019], “The content generation application 130 may be any content creation application including, for example, a word processing application (e.g., MICROSOFT WORD®), a presentation creation application (e.g., MICROSOFT POWERPOINT®), or any other content creation application (e.g., MICROSOFT EXCEL®, MICROSOFT ONENOTE®, MICROSOFT OUTLOOK®, MICROSOFT PUBLISHER®, MICROSOFT PROJECT®, or the like). The user system design components 135 may be included on the user system 105 as shown”, wherein it is noted that the BRI for a content editing application encompasses that the Autopilot application for generating intelligent content may be part of Microsoft PowerPoint application); as the user input text is being received, and before a sequence termination character is detected (i.e. para. [0016], “The user may make edits or request additional content, clarification, design assistance, and so forth as many times as desired such that the originally created content is updated and modified based on the minimal additional input by the users until the user selects and finalizes the suggested results”, wherein the BRI for a sequence termination character encompasses the text composing the “finalize” button),
providing text currently entered into the text field to a content item identification component of a writing assistance service (i.e. para. [0034], “FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary user interface 400 used to interface with the automated intelligent content creation system (e.g., user system design components 135, application/service component 110)”, wherein the BRI for a content item identification component of a writing assistance service encompasses how user text input is provided to a user system design component of a system 100 that generates and selects content for a user based on the text prompt); and
Using the content item identification component to identify user content items relevant to the writing prompt based on the text (i.e. para. [0033], “A user query that will use a natural language action is identified by the query understanding component, and at step 310 the natural language action is determined from an intent of the user query. The action category may be classified and the user query, action, and/or action category may be provided to a prompt design component (e.g., prompt design component 115). The prompt design component may generate a prompt at step 315 based on the determined action… At step 330, the output is used to generate response content in a format compatible with the content generation application”, wherein the user query is received, analyzed for intent, and then relevant content is identified and displayed as a prompt response by the prompt design component)¸ the user content items being one or more documents (i.e. para. [0040], “The natural language action may be used along with the current slide deck and context of the user history to design a prompt and submit the prompt to the natural language generation model. The output may be used to generate response content, and the user interface 700 may be updated”, wherein the BRI for documents encompasses the slide documents retrieved that correspond to the prompt text) which the user has previously (i.e. para. [0027], The intent detection step 212 may include using the user preference history, current deck global information, and/or current deck edit history from data 234) including one or more files, emails, messages, and/or web pages (i.e. para. [0027], “The intent detection step 212 may include using the user preference history, current deck global information, and/or current deck edit history from data 234 to determine the intent”, wherein the BRI for a document previously received and/or viewed encompasses how additional content to a user crafted prompt may draw from and be ranked based on one or more user historical file deck preferences or edited deck files);
displaying the user content items in a context item display element the UI component of the writing assistance client, the context item display element being separate from the text field (i.e. para. [0035], Fig. 4-5, “The prompt design tool then takes the action, user query, and/or classification to generate a prompt using prompt examples”, wherein it is noted in Figs. 4-5 that the prompt display is separate from the text field);
receiving user input selecting of at least one user content items to reference in the writing prompt (i.e. para. [0036], The proposed outline includes six (6) topics as depicted in FIG. 4, although any number of proposed topics may be generated. Each topic may have a corresponding checkbox in section 425 that allows the user to include or exclude the corresponding topic);
providing the selection to a context data retrieval component of the writing assistance service (i.e. para. [0032], the components of the intelligent content generation system 100, and specifically the user system design components 135 may be used in conjunction with other components of the content generation application 130 to provide content suggestions from the natural language generation model 125 as well as to provide design and layout suggestion); retrieving content and metadata pertaining to each selected user content item from the user context data collection using the context data retrieval component (i.e. para. [0038], “ FIG. 5 illustrates exemplary graphical user interface 500 that is generated after the user selects proposed outline topics”, wherein it is noted the user system design components 135 may be used in conjunction with other components of the content generation application 130 to access the knowledge repositories 120 to retrieve content and metadata pertaining to each selected proposed topic);
monitoring the user input for the sequence termination character (i.e. para. [0038], The user may complete the presentation with the selections already chosen by clicking the finalize button 535); in response to detecting the sequence termination character and before submitting the writing prompt to the AI writing engine, aggregating the content and the metadata with the writing prompt at a data interface (i.e. para. [0040], “The text on the selected slide associated with the radio button 710 states, as shown by text 715, “pollution reduces the ability to undergo photosynthesis.” In this example, the user may find this text 715 to be non-specific and may therefore use query box 505 to ask “how exactly does pollution affect it?” The user may then click the submit button 510 to submit the query in the query box 505. Using the context of the user history, current slide deck, and so forth, the query understanding component may process the query to generate a natural language action. The natural language action may be used along with the current slide deck and context of the user history to design a prompt and submit the prompt to the natural language generation model. The output may be used to generate response content, and the user interface 700 may be updated to display user interface 800 as depicted in FIG. 8”, wherein content may be retrieved, based on user history, and aggregated with the exiting user crafted prompt before a finalize button has been input. Wherein the BRI for a data interface encompasses any interface displaying data such as in Figs. 7-8);
generating a call by the data interface comprising the content to the AI writing engine (i.e. para. [0042], “FIG. 9 illustrates another exemplary graphical user interface 900 generated after the user has selected the finalize button 535. All selected options for each slide are displayed to the user”, wherein the BRI for generating a call encompasses how the final selections and refinements displayed in Fig. 8 are finalized and sent to the generative model in order to receive back the finished slideshow); processing, by a result processing component, the writing feedback from the AI writing engine, wherein the writing feedback includes information combined from the user content items (i.e. para. [0042], “The content document containing the selected options may be generated or updated with the selections”, wherein the BRI for a result processing component encompasses the generative model processing the final user selections and prompt refinements to generate the slideshow with all combined user selections above; and
providing the writing feedback to the UI component of the writing assistance client, wherein the writing feedback is displayed in the (i.e. para. [0033], Fig. 9, “The response content may be displayed at step 335. In some embodiments, the content document is updated with user selected response content and may be displayed via the content generation application 130”, wherein the generate slideshow is displayed in the user GUI in Fig. 9).
While Li implies that the automated intelligent content creation system interface may used with and integrated with numerous content generation applications (i.e. para. [0034], FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary user interface 400 used to interface with the automated intelligent content creation system …. This particular user interface 400 may be used with a presentation creation application such as MICROSOFT POWERPOINT® such that the user may request a presentation as depicted by the title), Li may not explicitly teach that UI component for generating the writing feedback is displayed in a
a pop-up window activated within a content editing application; and
wherein the writing feedback is displayed in the pop-up window,
However, Heyns teaches
wherein the UI component comprises a pop-up window activated within a content editing application (i.e. para. [0033], “UI configurations may be utilized to request detection of unoriginal content, to view suggested rewrites and/or select options for modifying the content. For example, a pop-up menu may be used);
wherein the writing feedback is displayed in the pop-up window (i.e. para. [0033], “Displaying a separate pane 240 alongside the content pane 220 may assist the user to move between identified unoriginal segments and view and approve suggested replacement text segments as the user is working on the document”, wherein it is noted that the intelligent generation of writing feedback may be displayed in the pop-up window) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a pop-up window activated within a content editing application; and wherein the writing feedback is displayed in the pop-up window, to Li’s writing prompt and query results, with how generative content edits within a content editing application may appear in a separate pop-up window, as taught by Heyns. One would have been motivated to combine the Heyns with Li, and would have had a reasonable expectation of success as the combination creates a streamlined interface in which a user may move and view and approve suggested text segments as the user is working on the document.
While Li-Heyns teaches as the user input is being received, identifying user content items relevant to the writing prompt based on the user input and that the user content items are being selected from user context data Li-Heyns may not explicitly teach that the user content items being selected from user context data is including
one or more documents which the user has previously authored.
However, Wang teaches
as the user input is being received, identifying user content items relevant to the writing prompt based on the user input (i.e. para. [0081], Fig. 5, “The first user interface displays entries to four sub-application: … an entry to an applet 3, …When the user taps the entry to the applet 3, the second terminal 140 displays a second user interface of the applet 3, and the second user interface displays the file information of the n previously used files), the user content items being selected from user context data and including one or more documents which the user has previously authored, received, and/or viewed, the one or more documents including one or more files, emails, messages, and/or web pages (i.e. para. [0081], Fig. 5, “Referring to FIG. 5 schematically, a user creates and edits documents “Work Plan for 2018” and “COM Principles and Applications” on the first terminal 120, and the first terminal 120 uploads the documents “Work Plan for 2018” and “COM Principles and Applications” to the server”, wherein it is noted that the displayed content items in response to user query input to applet 3 are previously authored documents files of the first user)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the user content items being selected from one or more documents which the user has previously authored, to Li-Heyns’ writing prompt and query results, how a user’s query input identifies documents relevant to a query prompt and displays content items from data that includes one or more documents that the user has previously authored or viewed, as taught by Wang. One would have been motivated to combine the Wang with Li-Heyns, and would have had a reasonable expectation of success as the combination provides saves a user time and can quickly access previously used files.
Claim 2:
Li, Heyns, and Wang teach the data processing system of claim 1.
Li further teaches wherein the AI writing engine communicates the writing prompt to a large language model (LLM) and receives the writing feedback from the LLM (i.e. para. [0030], “ The prompt design component 115 may be a machine learning based component to provide a large coverage of high-quality prompts to ensure the natural language generation model 125 generates valid and quality responses”, wherein the BRI for a LLM encompasses the large coverage of the NLP model) .
Claim 3:
Li, Heyns, and Wang teach the data processing system of claim 1.
Li further teaches wherein identifying the user content items, further comprises: processing the user input to identify key words pertaining to the writing prompt and identifying user content items relevant to the writing prompt based on the key words (i.e. para. [0033], “A user query that will use a natural language action is identified by the query understanding component, and at step 310 the natural language action is determined from an intent of the user query”, wherein it is noted that key query words are identified by the NLP and an intent is identified that is relevant to the generated prompts based on the query words); and identifying the user content items relevant to the writing prompt based on the key words (i.e. para. [0033], The action category may be classified and the user query, action, and/or action category may be provided to a prompt design component (e.g., prompt design component 115). The prompt design component may generate a prompt at step 315 based on the determined action).
Claim 4:
Li, Heyns, and Wang teach the data processing system of claim 3.
Li further teaches
wherein the user content items are identified by searching the user context data collection using the key words (i.e. para. [0023], The prompt design component 115 may access the knowledge repositories 120 including user preference data, a prompt library, and prompt examples to generate the prompt and return it to the application/service component).
Claim 5:
Li, Heyns, and Wang teach the data processing system of claim 4.
Li further teaches
wherein the user context data is collected over time and stored by an application service (i.e. para. [0035], “The prompt design tool then takes the action, user query, and/or classification to generate a prompt using prompt examples, the prompt library, user preference history, global information, edit history”, wherein it is noted that the knowledge repositories 120 including user preference data).
Claim 6:
Li, Heyns, and Wang teach the data processing system of claim 1.
Li further teaches
in response to detecting the sequence termination character, the content and the metadata for the content items referenced in the writing prompt is retrieved from a user context holder (i.e. para. [0035], “The prompt design tool then takes the action, user query, and/or classification to generate a prompt using prompt examples, the prompt library, user preference history, global information, edit history”, wherein it is noted that when the user clicks the Finalize button, user selected topics are refenced in the created content).
Claim 8:
Claim 8 is the method claim of Claim 1 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 9:
Claim 9 is the method claim of Claim 2 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 10:
Claim 10 is the method claim of Claim 3 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 11:
Claim 11 is the method claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 4 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 12:
Claim 12 is the method claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 5 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 13:
Claim 13 is the method claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 6 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 15:
Claim 15 is the method claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 1 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 16:
Claim 16 is the medium claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 1 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 17:
Claim 17 is the medium claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 2 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 18:
Claim 18 is the medium claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 4 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 19:
Claim 19 is the medium claim reciting similar limitations to Claim 5 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20210004432 “Li", para. [0044], FIG. 4 is a flow diagram depicting an exemplary method 400 for providing intelligent rephrasing suggestions for a selected text segment. At 405, method 400 may begin by receiving a request to initiate providing replacement text segment suggestions. This may occur, for example, when the user utilizes an input/output device (e.g. a mouse) coupled to a computer client device to a select a text segment (e.g., a text string containing one or more words) in a document displayed by the client device and proceeds to invoke a UI element to request that suggestions for rephrasing the selected text segment be provided.
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 DAVID H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7433. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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, Cesar Paula can be reached at (571) 272-4128. 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.
/D.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2145
/CESAR B PAULA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2145
