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 Non-Final Rejection is filed in response to Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed 03/23/2026.
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 11-13, 15, 16, and 18-19 are amended.
Claims 7, 14, and 20 are cancelled.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-19 remain pending.
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 1 is 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. Claim 1 recites the limitations, “storing the content and the metadata in a user context holder implemented in the memory, wherein the user context holder is cleared before each writing prompt is received” in pg. 2 lines 4-5. As this limitation pertains to storing data so that the writing assistance client may use the stored data to generate and provide contextual writing assistance, it is unclear how the invention would function if the stored data that is used by the writing assistance client is cleared before each prompt is even received by the client. It is also unclear what is the trigger that would clear the user context holder, as the writing prompt may be considered to be received by a display or as the writing prompt may considered to be received by a writing assistance service due to the detection of a sequence termination character.
There is insufficient support in the specification that describes how data stored in a user context holder is being cleared before each writing prompt is received. At most applicant’s specification filed 04/21/2023 cites support for the opposite of the claimed limitation as para. [0037] cites, “User context holder 222 stores content and metadata for all content items referenced in the current writing prompt. In embodiments, user context holder 222 is cleared after each writing prompt has been processed. Alternatively, the user can specify whether to maintain the current context data for subsequent writing prompts”. When reading the limitation in light of the specification and for the purpose of examination, the BRI of the limitation, “wherein the user context holder is cleared before each writing prompt is received”, is being interpreted as wherein the user context holder is cleared of some data before each writing prompt is received by the writing assistance service after a sequence termination character is detected. Primary claims 8 and 16 are rejected for similar reasons.
Response to Arguments
Argument 1, Applicant argues in Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment filed 03/23/2026 pg. 8-11, that Li fails to teach the primary claim limitation, “wherein the user context holder is cleared before each writing prompt is received”
Response to Argument 1, the examiner respectfully disagrees as reading the specification in light of the limitation leads to a BRI in which a user context item may be cleared of some data before each writing prompt is received to be finalized by an AI writing engine. The examiner notes that the system 100 for automated intelligent content generation generates prompt options for display in Figs 4-5 and which may be stored in a cache as the data is displayed. The user may then not select certain displayed options and as a user iterates their prompt, the unselected options would be cleared from display before the prompt is finalized for the content generation. Thus the BRI for the limitation, “wherein the user context holder is cleared before each writing prompt is received”, would encompass how certain content and metadata items are cleared from a user context holder before each writing prompt is received by the generation engine for finalization.
This is supported by the following paragraphs of Li:
para. [0027], “The user may choose to keep one or more of the options at step 246 such that the content document is updated at step … content document is updated at step 248, a new user query is awaited at step 202”,
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”.
Argument 2, Applicant argues in Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment filed 03/23/2026 pg. 11, that prior art fails to teach “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”
Response to Argument 2, the examiner respectfully disagrees as it is noted in Li, Figs. 4-5 that the display area for display of context items for a proposed outline and slides are separate from the user’s text field input.
PNG
media_image1.png
564
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
576
724
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20220229832 “Li” 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); 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 context 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 context 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 for automated intelligent content generation), and
Using the context item identification component 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 item 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 a context data collection using the context item 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);
storing the content and the metadata (i.e. para. [0036], Fig. 4-5, “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”, wherein the BRI for a user context holder encompasses how a user’s selection of the specific proposed topics would be held at least temporarily in a cache memory from Fig. 4-5) in a user context holder implemented in the memory (i.e. para. [0046], storage system 1005 may include volatile and nonvolatile, removable and non-removable media implemented in any method or technology for storage of information, such as … cache memory or other data), wherein the user context holder is cleared before each writing prompt is received (i.e. para. [0027], Fig. 2, “The user may choose to keep one or more of the options at step 246 such that the content document is updated at step … content document is updated at step 248, a new user query is awaited at step 202”, wherein options generated for display in Figs 4-5 may not be selected by a user and thus as a user iterates their prompt, the unselected options would be cleared from display before the prompt is finalized);
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, adding the retrieved content and the metadata to the writing prompt (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 additional content may be retrieved, based on user history, and added to the user crafted prompt before a finalize button has been input);
supplying the writing prompt 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); receiving the writing feedback from the AI writing engine (i.e. para. [0042], The content document containing the selected options may be generated or updated with the selections); and providing the writing feedback to the UI component of the writing assistance client (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 BRI for writing feedback encompasses how the generated prompt is provided for display to the user in Fig. 9).
While Li 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 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’s 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, 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 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 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 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 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 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 the 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. 20230259539 “Course", para. [0053-0054], an author name, where the author name is transformed into the latent space by taking an aggregate statistic (such as the mean) of a latent vector of the author's previously authored documents; a team name, where the team name is transformed into the latent space by taking an aggregate statistic (such as the mean) of a latent vector of the team's previously authored documents; a date range, where the date is transformed into the latent space by taking an aggregate statistic measure (such as the mean) of the latent vector of other documents authored on within the query date.
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
Prosecution Insights