Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/340,414

AUTOMATIC CONTENT ITEM UPDATION BASED ON COMPUTER-MEDIATED INTERACTION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 23, 2023
Examiner
ELAHEE, MD S
Art Unit
2694
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Google LLC
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
655 granted / 827 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
855
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.2%
-33.8% vs TC avg
§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 827 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bueche et al. (US Patent No. 11,776,542). Regarding claim 1, with respect to Figures 1-8, Bueche teaches a computer-implemented method to automatically modify a content item, comprising: programmatically analyzing computer-mediated interaction between a user and a customer service agent to determine if the computer-mediated interaction is successful, wherein the computer-mediated interaction is with reference to the content item (abstract; fig.1,3; col.6, lines 37-51, col.11, lines 14-31); identifying context [i.e., information] provided by the customer service agent during the computer-mediated interaction (fig.1,3; col.6, lines 37-51, col.10, lines 11-67, col.11, lines 14-31); generating a score pool of questions/rank of question [i.e., content update] based on the identified information (fig.3-4; col.10, lines 11-67 col.11, lines 14-31); and modifying the score of questions/rank of question [i.e., content item] based on the content update (fig.3-4; col.10, lines 11-67, col.11, lines 14-31). Regarding claims 2, 13 and 18, Bueche teaches wherein the programmatically analyzing is performed in response to determining that a rating associated with the content item is below a threshold (fig.3-4; col.10, lines 11-67, col.11, lines 14-31). Regarding claim 4, Bueche teaches wherein the computer-mediated interaction includes one or more of: a call, a synchronous chat, or asynchronous interaction (fig.3-4; col.10, lines 11-67, col.11, lines 14-31). Regarding claims 5, 15 and 20, Bueche teaches wherein the programmatically analyzing includes detecting a user sentiment during the computer-mediated interaction based on one or more of: text, speech, or video of the user (fig.3-4; col.10, lines 11-67, col.11, lines 14-31). Claim 12 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Bueche teaches a computing device comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, with instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations (col.17, lines 49-67, col.21, lines 37-64). Claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Bueche teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium with instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations (col.17, lines 49-67, col.21, lines 37-64). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 3, 6, 7, 9-11, 14, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bueche (US Patent No. 11,776,542). Regarding claims 3, 14 and 19, Bueche does not specifically teach wherein determining that the rating associated with the content item is below the threshold comprises determining that a contact rate of customers to a customer service center for support after views of the content item by the customers is higher than a predetermined rate. Examiner takes an official notice wherein determining that the rating associated with the content item is below the threshold comprises determining that a contact rate of customers to a customer service center for support after views of the content item by the customers is higher than a predetermined rate is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bueche to incorporate the feature of wherein determining that the rating associated with the content item is below the threshold comprises determining that a contact rate of customers to a customer service center for support after views of the content item by the customers is higher than a predetermined rate in Bueche’s invention in order to conveniently measure a rate of contact of customers to a service center for a desired support. Regarding claim 6, Bueche teaches wherein the interaction is successful if the user sentiment at an endpoint of the computer-mediated interaction meets a threshold, and wherein identifying information provided by the customer service agent comprises identifying a subset of text, speech, or video of the customer service agent near a time (fig.3-4; col.10, lines 11-67, col.11, lines 14-31). However, Bueche does not specifically teach identifying a subset of text, speech, or video of the customer service agent near a time during the computer-mediated interaction at which the user sentiment changes from below the threshold to above the threshold. Examiner takes an official notice identifying a subset of text, speech, or video of the customer service agent near a time during the computer-mediated interaction at which the user sentiment changes from below the threshold to above the threshold is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bueche to incorporate the feature of identifying a subset of text, speech, or video of the customer service agent near a time during the computer-mediated interaction at which the user sentiment changes from below the threshold to above the threshold in Bueche’s invention in order to provide a status of a customer interaction without having any inconvenience. Regarding claim 7, Bueche does not specifically teach wherein the subset of text, speech, or video includes a link to a second content item, and wherein generating the content update includes generating text with the link to the second content item, and wherein modifying the content item comprises inserting the text with the link to the second content item in the content item. Examiner takes an official notice wherein the subset of text, speech, or video includes a link to a second content item, and wherein generating the content update includes generating text with the link to the second content item, and wherein modifying the content item comprises inserting the text with the link to the second content item in the content item is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bueche to incorporate the feature of wherein the subset of text, speech, or video includes a link to a second content item, and wherein generating the content update includes generating text with the link to the second content item, and wherein modifying the content item comprises inserting the text with the link to the second content item in the content item in Bueche’s invention in order to provide a desired update of content beneficial for a customer. Regarding claim 9, Bueche does not specifically teach wherein the content item is a help article and wherein the computer-mediated interaction is with reference to a user interface of a software product, wherein information provided by the customer service agent includes a screenshot or a video of the user interface of the software product, and wherein the content update comprises the screenshot or the video. Examiner takes an official notice wherein the content item is a help article and wherein the computer-mediated interaction is with reference to a user interface of a software product, wherein information provided by the customer service agent includes a screenshot or a video of the user interface of the software product, and wherein the content update comprises the screenshot or the video item is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bueche to incorporate the feature of wherein the content item is a help article and wherein the computer-mediated interaction is with reference to a user interface of a software product, wherein information provided by the customer service agent includes a screenshot or a video of the user interface of the software product, and wherein the content update comprises the screenshot or the video in Bueche’s invention in order to provide a desired update of a software product beneficial for a customer. Regarding claim 10 and 16, Bueche teaches displaying the content to the customer service agent; and receiving confirmation of the content from the customer service agent, wherein modifying the content item is performed in response to receiving the confirmation (col.6, lines 52-67, col.7, lines 1-10). However, Bueche does not specifically teach displaying the content update and receiving confirmation of the content update. Examiner takes an official notice displaying the content update and receiving confirmation of the content update is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bueche to incorporate the feature of displaying the content update and receiving confirmation of the content update in Bueche’s invention in order to provide a desired updated content. Regarding claim 11, Bueche teaches determining that the information provided by the customer service agent during the computer-mediated interaction is from a third content item (col.6, lines 52-67, col.7, lines 1-10). However, Bueche does not specifically teach wherein generating the content update comprises one or more of: merging the content item with the third content item, inserting a link to the third content item in the content item, or replacing a portion of the content item with a portion of the third content item. Examiner takes wherein generating the content update comprises one or more of: merging the content item with the third content item, inserting a link to the third content item in the content item, or replacing a portion of the content item with a portion of the third content item is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bueche to incorporate the feature of wherein generating the content update comprises one or more of: merging the content item with the third content item, inserting a link to the third content item in the content item, or replacing a portion of the content item with a portion of the third content item in Bueche’s invention in order to provide a desired update of content from which a customer can be benefitted. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bueche (US Patent No. 11,776,542) in view of Hays et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0282769). Regarding claim 8, Bueche teaches wherein the content item includes one or more of item text, item audio, or item video (fig.3-4; col.10, lines 11-67, col.11, lines 14-31). However, Bueche does not specifically teach wherein modifying the content item comprises determining an insertion point for the additional content. Hays teaches wherein modifying the content item comprises determining an insertion point for the additional content (abstract; paragraphs 0015, 0030, 0033-0038). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Bueche to incorporate the feature of wherein the speech enhancement processing comprises first-order speech enhancement, wherein the first-order speech enhancement comprises at least one of an audio speed change, a volume adjustment, a random displacement, a noise enhancement and a multiplication enhancement in Bueche’s invention as taught by Hays. The motivation for the modification is to do so in order to conveniently add an additional information. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD S ELAHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7536. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 8:30AM to 5:00PM EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FAN TSANG can be reached on 571-272-7547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /MD S ELAHEE/ MD SHAFIUL ALAM ELAHEE Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694 September 6, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 25, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 25, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604133
SYSTEM AND METHOD OF ASSEMBLING AN ADJUSTABLE CLAMPING EAR CUP ASSEMBLY FOR AN AUDIO HEADSET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596891
CROSS-LINGUAL NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING MODEL FOR MULTI-LANGUAGE NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING (mNLU)
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598260
HYBRID DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSING-ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ACOUSTIC ECHO CANCELLATION FOR VIRTUAL CONFERENCES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597412
Contextual Digital Assistant for Presentation Assistance
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585889
NATURAL LANGUAGE GENERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.8%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 827 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month