DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-15 are pending.
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 .
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2023-0002455, filed on January 6, 2023. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 31, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
5. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 26, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
6. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 29, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
7. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention recites a judicial exception, is directed to that judicial exception, an abstract idea, as it has not been integrated into practical application and the claims further do not recite significantly more than the judicial exception. Examiner has evaluated the claims under the framework provided in the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance published in the Federal Register 01/07/2019 and has provided such analysis below.
8. Step 1:
Claims 1-10 are directed to a notification message display method of an electronic device and fall within the statutory category of processes and claims 11-15 are directed to an electronic device and fall within the statutory category of machines. Therefore, “Are the claims to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?” Yes.
In order to evaluate the Step 2A inquiry “Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon or an abstract idea?” we must determine, at Step 2A Prong 1, whether the claim recites a law of nature, a natural phenomenon or an abstract idea and further whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
9. Step 2A Prong 1:
Claims 1 and 11: The limitations of “receiving, from a server device, a notification message and keyword metadata corresponding to an event occurrence of an external electronic device; determining contextual information of a user based on a notification acknowledgement action being input from the user; determining at least one keyword that corresponds to the determined contextual information; and based on the determined at least one keyword and the determined contextual information: maintaining the notification message and displaying the maintained notification message on a screen, or reconstructing the notification message and displaying the reconstructed notification message on the screen”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think and observe, judge and evaluate that a notification that is associated with a keyword corresponding to contextual information is displayed on a screen. Additionally, simply updating and displaying data on a screen is merely insignificant extra solution activity such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application under Prong 2. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Under Step 2B, the courts have identified functions such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data as well-understood, routine, conventional activity, thus do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
Therefore, Yes, claim 1 recites judicial exceptions.
The claims have been identified to recite judicial exceptions, Step 2A Prong 2 will evaluate whether the claims are directed to the judicial exception.
10. Step 2A Prong 2:
Claims 1 and 11: The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the following additional elements – “A notification message display method of an electronic device, the method comprising:” and “An electronic device, comprising: a communicator configured to receive, from a servicer device, a notification message and keyword metadata corresponding to an event occurrence of an external electronic device; an inputter configured to receive a user command from a user; a screen; and a controller configured to:”, which is merely recitations of generic computing components and functions merely being used as a tool to apply the abstract idea (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)) which does not integrate a judicial exception into practical application.
Therefore, “Do the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? No, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
After having evaluating the inquires set forth in Steps 2A Prong 1 and 2, it has been concluded that the claim 1 not only recites a judicial exception but that the claim is directed to the judicial exception as the judicial exception has not been integrated into practical application.
11. Step 2B:
Claims 1 and 11: The claims do not include additional elements, alone or in combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than generic computing components and field of use/technological environment which do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Therefore, “Do the claims recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? No, these additional elements, alone or in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Having concluded analysis within the provided framework, Claims 1 and 11 do not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
12. With regard to claims 2 and 12, they recite additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes: determining whether the contextual information of the user is changed, and based on determining that the contextual information is changed, determining the at least one keyword that corresponds to the changed contextual information.”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate when the contextual information is changed, determining a keyword associated with the changed contextual information. Additionally, updating the keyword is insignificant extra solution activity such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application under Prong 2. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Under Step 2B, the courts have identified functions such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data as well-understood, routine, conventional activity, thus do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(d). Further, claims 2 and 12 do not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claims 2 and 12 also fail both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claims 2 and 12 do not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
13. With regard to claim 3 and 13, they recite additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the determining of whether the contextual information of the user is changed includes determining that the contextual information of the user is changed based on an event at a time that the notification message was received being different from an event at a time that the notification acknowledgement action is input”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the contextual information has changed based on an event at a time that the notification was received being different from an event at a time that the notification acknowledgement action is input. Further, claims 3 and 13 do not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claims 3 and 13 also fail both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claims 3 and 13 do not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
14. With regard to claim 4 and 14, they recite additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the determining of whether the contextual information of the user is changed includes determining that the contextual information of the user is changed based on a location of the user at a time that the notification message was received being different from a location of the user at a time that the notification acknowledgement action is input”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the contextual information has changed based on the user’s location at a time that the notification was received being different from the user’s location at a time that the notification acknowledgement action is input. Further, claims 4 and 14 do not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claims 4 and 14 also fail both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claims 4 and 14 do not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
15. With regard to claim 5 and 15, they recite additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword based on a size of the screen”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the determining of the keyword(s) includes reducing at least one keyword based on the size of the screen. If the screen is smaller, the notification has to have less words. Additionally, this merely recites instructions to implement an abstract idea on a generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea, thus is not a practical application under Prong 2, or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception under Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, claims 5 and 15 do not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claims 5 and 15 also fail both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claims 5 and 15 do not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
16. With regard to claim 6, it recites additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the reducing of the quantity of the at least one keyword includes reducing the quantity of the at least one keyword by omitting a low priority keyword”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the determining of the keyword(s) includes reducing at least one keyword based on the priority of the keyword. Additionally, this merely recites instructions to implement an abstract idea on a generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea, thus is not a practical application under Prong 2, or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception under Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, claim 6 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 6 also fails both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claim 6 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
17. With regard to claim 7, it recites additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword based on content being displayed on the screen”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the determining of the keyword(s) includes reducing at least one keyword based on the content being displayed on the screen. If the screen is displaying more content, the notification has to be smaller to avoid disrupting the content. Additionally, this merely recites instructions to implement an abstract idea on a generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea, thus is not a practical application under Prong 2, or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception under Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, claim 7 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 7 also fails both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claim 7 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
18. With regard to claim 8, it recites additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword due to a size of a text displayed on the screen”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the determining of the keyword(s) includes reducing at least one keyword based on the size of the text being displayed on the screen. If the screen is displaying larger text, the notification has to be smaller to avoid disrupting the content. Additionally, this merely recites instructions to implement an abstract idea on a generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea, thus is not a practical application under Prong 2, or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception under Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, claim 8 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 8 also fails both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claim 8 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
19. With regard to claim 9, it recites additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes differently determining the at least one keyword of the electronic device, based on the notification acknowledgement action being input to the external electronic device”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the determining of the keyword(s) includes determining the keyword based on the notification acknowledgement action being inputted. Additionally, this merely recites instructions to implement an abstract idea on a generic computer, or merely uses a generic computer or computer components as a tool to perform the abstract idea, thus is not a practical application under Prong 2, or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception under Step 2B. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, claim 9 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 9 also fails both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claim 9 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
20. With regard to claim 10, it recites additional abstract idea recitations of “wherein the reconstructing of the notification message includes, based on a preset user command being input to an inputter: reconstructing the notification message by highlighting the at least one keyword, or omitting the notification message except for the at least one keyword”, as drafted, is a process that, but for the recitation of generic computing components, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, a person can think about and observe, judge and evaluate that the notification is restructured to highlight the keyword, or omitting the message except for the keyword. Additionally, this merely recites insignificant extra solution activity such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application under Prong 2. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Under Step 2B, the courts have identified functions such as gathering, displaying, updating, transmitting and storing data as well-understood, routine, conventional activity, thus do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. See MPEP 2106.05(d). Further, claim 10 does not recite any further additional elements and for the same reasons as above with regard to integration into practical application and whether additional elements amount to significantly more, claim 10 also fails both Step 2A prong 2, thus the claims are directed to the judicial exception as it has not been integrated into practical application, and fails Step 2B as not amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, Claim 10 does not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
21. Therefore, Claims 1-15 do not recite patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
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.
22. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. US 10936918 B2 in view of Cassidy US 20200034433 A1.
Yun et al. was cited in IDS filed on April 26, 2024.
23. With regard to claim 1, Yun teaches:
A notification message display method of an electronic device, the method comprising:
receiving, from a server device, a notification message and keyword metadata corresponding to an event occurrence of an external electronic device (Col. 5, lines 52-63, First, an electronic device may receive a signal for sensing an event for providing information (e.g., an alarm event) from an external source. For example, as illustrated in section (a) of FIG. 1, the electronic device may receive, from an external source, a signal for sensing an event 10 that an e-mail for reserving a concert ticket is received. The event may be implemented as a variety of events such as a text message reception event, a call reception event, an information request reception event, a social networking service (SNS) reception or notification event, a chat service reception or notification event, a pushed notification event, and the like, in addition to the e-mail reception event.);
determining contextual information of a user based on a notification acknowledgement action being input from the user (Col. 5, lines 64 – Col. 6, lines 19, When a signal for sensing an event is received, the electronic device 100 may obtain peripheral context information of the electronic device 100. For example, the electronic device 100 may obtain data for sensing a peripheral context of the electronic device 100 or data stored in the electronic device 100 (e.g., schedule data, etc.) by use of a sensor provided in the electronic device 100 (e.g., a camera, a GPS sensor, etc.). It is understood, however, that this is only an example, and one or more other embodiments may not be limited thereto. For example, the electronic device 100 may obtain data for sensing a peripheral context of the electronic device 100 from an external device (e.g., IoT device, etc.) interlocked with or communicably connected to the electronic device 100. The context information may be information relating to a space in which the electronic device 100 is located or information relating to a user who uses the electronic device 100, which may include information relating to at least one user present in a space in which the electronic device 100 is located. However, this is only an example, and the context information may include information relating to a user schedule, information relating to a location at which the electronic device 100 is located, and the like; Col. 6, lines 59 – Col. 7, lines 5; The external server 200 may output information for an event based on the information relating to the event and the obtained context information. In detail, the external server 200 may input information relating to the received event and the obtained context information to a second model trained by an artificial intelligence model and obtain output information for the event. The second model may be a model that is trained to obtain output information for the event by using the information relating to the event and the context information (or data for obtaining context information) as input data, which may be retrained by feedback information input by a user. In addition, the output information for the event may be information that includes at least a part of the context included in the event and information relating to the event.);
determining at least one keyword that corresponds to the determined contextual information (Fig. 1; Fig. 5A; Fig. 5B; Col. 7, lines 16-39, For example, in a case in which the information relating to the event includes information relating to a concert ticket reservation and the context information includes information relating to a user present near the electronic device 100, the external server 200 may obtain output information for the event by using the second model. In a case in which a user is present alone in a living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may, as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 1, use the second model to obtain output information for the event of “You've got a mail from ‘Inxxxpark’, notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30 pm on October 15th.” In other words, in a case in which a user is present alone, the external server 200 may obtain output information including details of specific contents included in the event. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may obtain output information relating to the event of “You've got an e-mail from ‘Inxxxpark’” as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 1, using the second model. In other words, in a case in which the user is present together with another person, the external server 200 may obtain output information including brief or less information about the event reception itself; Examiner’s Note: Keywords included in the notification are determined based on the contextual information of whether the user is together with another person are not. When the user is alone, the notification includes “notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30pm on October 15th.” Whereas, when the user is with their parents, the notification is shorted to ‘You’ve got an e-mail from ‘lnxxxpark’’. This indicates a change in keywords based contextual information.); and
based on the determined at least one keyword and the determined contextual information:
maintaining the notification message and displaying the maintained notification message on a screen, or reconstructing the notification message and displaying the reconstructed notification message on the screen (Fig. 1; Fig. 5A; Fig. 5B; Col. 7, lines 16-39, For example, in a case in which the information relating to the event includes information relating to a concert ticket reservation and the context information includes information relating to a user present near the electronic device 100, the external server 200 may obtain output information for the event by using the second model. In a case in which a user is present alone in a living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may, as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 1, use the second model to obtain output information for the event of “You've got a mail from ‘Inxxxpark’, notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30 pm on October 15th.” In other words, in a case in which a user is present alone, the external server 200 may obtain output information including details of specific contents included in the event. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may obtain output information relating to the event of “You've got an e-mail from ‘Inxxxpark’” as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 1, using the second model. In other words, in a case in which the user is present together with another person, the external server 200 may obtain output information including brief or less information about the event reception itself.).
Although Yun teaches the concept of keywords by extracting important information for a notification, but changing the information based on contextual information, Cassidy is brought into further define this concept as a “keyword”.
In analogous art, Cassidy teaches:
[0013] For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yun with the teachings of Cassidy of keywords. Yun teaches of reconstructing notifications based on contextual information. These notifications still contain keywords. For example, an email notification may contain the keywords of “You have received an email,” but the details change based on contextual information (see at least Col. 7, lines 16-39). Similarly to Yun, Cassidy teaches displaying a notification and specific keywords based on factors such as displayable area, text and font size, word count, and any other factors that limit an amount of displayable text. By analyzing the notification and identifying keywords, the notification can be presented to the user based on available displayable area so that the user can quickly determine important information. For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance, as discussed in Cassidy ([0013]).
24. With regard to claim 2, Yun further teaches:
wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes:
determining whether the contextual information of the user is changed, and based on determining that the contextual information is changed, determining the at least one keyword that corresponds to the changed contextual information (Fig. 1; Fig. 5A; Fig. 5B; Col. 7, lines 16-39, For example, in a case in which the information relating to the event includes information relating to a concert ticket reservation and the context information includes information relating to a user present near the electronic device 100, the external server 200 may obtain output information for the event by using the second model. In a case in which a user is present alone in a living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may, as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 1, use the second model to obtain output information for the event of “You've got a mail from ‘Inxxxpark’, notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30 pm on October 15th.” In other words, in a case in which a user is present alone, the external server 200 may obtain output information including details of specific contents included in the event. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may obtain output information relating to the event of “You've got an e-mail from ‘Inxxxpark’” as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 1, using the second model. In other words, in a case in which the user is present together with another person, the external server 200 may obtain output information including brief or less information about the event reception itself; Examiner’s Note: Keywords included in the notification are determined based on the contextual information of whether the user is together with another person are not. When the user is alone, the notification includes “notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30pm on October 15th.” Whereas, when the user is with their parents, the notification is shorted to ‘You’ve got an e-mail from ‘lnxxxpark’’. This indicates a change in keywords based contextual information.).
25. With regard to claim 3, Yun further teaches:
wherein the determining of whether the contextual information of the user is changed includes determining that the contextual information of the user is changed based on an event at a time that the notification message was received being different from an event at a time that the notification acknowledgement action is input (Col. 15, lines 55 – Col. 16, lines 4, For example, in a case in which an alarm event is received as illustrated in section (a) of FIG. 5B after the artificial intelligence model is updated by the feedback information, when information “only a main user is present in the vehicle” is included in the context information, the server 200 may obtain a control command of “automatically connect to speakerphone in vehicle” as a main user mode as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 5B. In a case in which the context information includes information about “main user is present together with boss B in the vehicle,” the server 200 may, as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 5B, obtain a control command of “Automatically send a reply text message ‘I will call again later’” as a target-aware mode. According to another embodiment, the electronic device 100 may directly perform the retraining or further training of an artificial intelligence model stored therein by using the received feedback information.).
26. With regard to claim 4, Yun further teaches:
wherein the determining of whether the contextual information of the user is changed includes determining that the contextual information of the user is changed based on a location of the user at a time that the notification message was received being different from a location of the user at a time that the notification acknowledgement action is input (Col. 7, lines 40-55, As another example, the external server 200 may determine, by means of the second model, an output method for the event. In a case in which the user is present alone in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is located, the external server 200 may, by means of the second model, determine an outputting method for the event to be an outputting method using a display and a speaker. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is located, the external server 200 may determine, by means of the second model, an outputting method for the event to be an outputting method using a display. According to another embodiment, the external server 200 may determine both the output information for the event by using the second model, as described above, and the outputting method for the event by using the second model, as described above.).
27. With regard to claim 5, Yun teaches the notification message display method of claim 1 but fails to explicitly teach wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword based on a size of the screen.
However, in analogous art, Cassidy teaches:
wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword based on a size of the screen ([0025] FIG. 6 illustrates an example process 600 for summarizing text and presenting the same to a user that can be used in accordance with various embodiments. It should be understood that, for this and other processes discussed herein, there can be additional, fewer, or alternative steps, performed in similar or alternative steps, or in parallel, within the scope of the various embodiments unless otherwise stated. In this example, a communication including a body of text, or other text content, to be presented on a computing device is identified or received 602. The received communication could be in the form of an email, a breaking news update, a friend's status update, and so on as described above. In this example, the body of text is analyzed to determine whether it meets at least one summarization criterion for a type of notification 604. In this example, the summarization criterion for a particular application includes display constraints, such as word count, font size, and any other factors limiting an amount of displayable text or content, and the notification could be a summary line in an email inbox, a notification for display on a lock-screen, or a notification on a separate summary page as described elsewhere herein. In this example, the body of text is analyzed to identify keywords from a library of action words 606 associated with topics, such as dates, action required, friends, family, events, and so on. The action words include a predetermined rank and are weighted by importance or relevance to these and other topics. As mentioned above, this ranking may change over time as life changes and new interests evolve for a particular user. Once keywords are identified, a relative ranking of the identified keywords is determined for the body of text based in part on the rank or weighting associated with each identified keyword from the library of action words 608. Subsequently, a summary is generated using the ranked identified keywords according to a text summary algorithm 610. In this example, the summary with the type of notification is provided for display on the display element of the computing device 612. Various other types of information and notifications can be utilized and provided as well within the scope of the various embodiments.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yun with the teachings of Cassidy wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword based on a size of the screen. Similarly to Yun, Cassidy teaches displaying a notification and specific keywords based on factors such as displayable area, text and font size, word count, and any other factors that limit an amount of displayable text. By analyzing the notification and identifying keywords, the notification can be presented to the user based on available displayable area so that the user can quickly determine important information. For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance, as discussed in Cassidy ([0013]).
28. With regard to claim 6, Cassidy further teaches:
wherein the reducing of the quantity of the at least one keyword includes reducing the quantity of the at least one keyword by omitting a low priority keyword ([0013] For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance; Examiner’s Note: Keywords having a particular importance or relevance are singled out, indicating that keywords with lower priority is omitted.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yun with the teachings of Cassidy wherein the reducing of the quantity of the at least one keyword includes reducing the quantity of the at least one keyword by omitting a low priority keyword. Similarly to Yun, Cassidy teaches displaying a notification and specific keywords based on factors such as displayable area, text and font size, word count, and any other factors that limit an amount of displayable text. By analyzing the notification and identifying keywords, the notification can be presented to the user so that the user can quickly determine important information. For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance, as discussed in Cassidy ([0013]). Here, only the important information is presented to the user in the notification, allowing the user to quickly determine keywords such as dates, times, and other important information.
29. With regard to claim 7, Cassidy further teaches:
wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword based on content being displayed on the screen ([0013] In various embodiments, a body of text can be summarized, with the amount by which the body of text is summarized being determined based in part by the amount of presentable or displayable area available on a particular device, application, or combination thereof. For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yun with the teachings of Cassidy wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword based on content being displayed on the screen. Similarly to Yun, Cassidy teaches displaying a notification and specific keywords based on factors such as displayable area, text and font size, word count, and any other factors that limit an amount of displayable text. By analyzing the notification and identifying keywords, the notification can be presented to the user based on available displayable area and content being displayed on the screen, so that the user can quickly determine important information. For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance, as discussed in Cassidy ([0013]).
30. With regard to claim 8, Cassidy further teaches:
wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword due to a size of a text displayed on the screen ([0025] In this example, the summarization criterion for a particular application includes display constraints, such as word count, font size, and any other factors limiting an amount of displayable text or content, and the notification could be a summary line in an email inbox, a notification for display on a lock-screen, or a notification on a separate summary page as described elsewhere herein. In this example, the body of text is analyzed to identify keywords from a library of action words 606 associated with topics, such as dates, action required, friends, family, events, and so on. The action words include a predetermined rank and are weighted by importance or relevance to these and other topics. As mentioned above, this ranking may change over time as life changes and new interests evolve for a particular user. Once keywords are identified, a relative ranking of the identified keywords is determined for the body of text based in part on the rank or weighting associated with each identified keyword from the library of action words 608. Subsequently, a summary is generated using the ranked identified keywords according to a text summary algorithm 610. In this example, the summary with the type of notification is provided for display on the display element of the computing device 612. Various other types of information and notifications can be utilized and provided as well within the scope of the various embodiments.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yun with the teachings of Cassidy wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes reducing a quantity of the at least one keyword due to a size of a text displayed on the screen. Similarly to Yun, Cassidy teaches displaying a notification and specific keywords based on factors such as displayable area, text and font size, word count, and any other factors that limit an amount of displayable text. By analyzing the notification and identifying keywords, the notification can be presented to the user based the size of the text displayed on the screen so that the user can quickly determine important information. For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance, as discussed in Cassidy ([0013]).
31. With regard to claim 9, Yun further teaches:
wherein the determining of the at least one keyword includes differently determining the at least one keyword of the electronic device, based on the notification acknowledgement action being input to the external electronic device (Col. 7, lines 16-39, For example, in a case in which the information relating to the event includes information relating to a concert ticket reservation and the context information includes information relating to a user present near the electronic device 100, the external server 200 may obtain output information for the event by using the second model. In a case in which a user is present alone in a living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may, as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 1, use the second model to obtain output information for the event of “You've got a mail from ‘Inxxxpark’, notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30 pm on October 15th.” In other words, in a case in which a user is present alone, the external server 200 may obtain output information including details of specific contents included in the event. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may obtain output information relating to the event of “You've got an e-mail from ‘Inxxxpark’” as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 1, using the second model. In other words, in a case in which the user is present together with another person, the external server 200 may obtain output information including brief or less information about the event reception itself; Col. 8, lines 7-26, In addition, while or after the output information for the event is provided, the electronic device 100 may obtain feedback information input by a user. The feedback information may include at least one of user's reaction information (e.g., a user's facial expression, behavior, etc., after output information is output) for the output information, control command information for an event input by the user after the output information is output, and information found by the user after the output information is output. The electronic device 100 may transmit feedback information input by a user to the external server 200. The external server 200 may retrain or further train the second model by using the received feedback information. According to another embodiment, in which the artificial intelligence model is stored in the electronic device, the electronic device may directly retrain or further train the second model by using the feedback information input by the user. A relearning process of an artificial intelligence model will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings; Col. 12, lines 36-46, The processor 150 may obtain, from the external server 200, output information for an event obtained by the trained second model. For example, in a case in which the context information includes information relating to a main user using the electronic device 100 and does not include information relating to any other person (e.g., in the vicinity of the electronic device 100), the second model may obtain or provide, as an output, output information including detailed information about the event (or output information including an instruction to output detailed information about the event); Col. 15, lines 29-42, The electronic device 100 may receive an input of feedback information according to a user input, at operation S470. The feedback information may be information relating to a user command input by the user to the electronic device after performing an operation related to an alarm event. For example, in a case in which the main user is present together with his/her boss B in the vehicle, the electronic device 100 performs an automatic connection using a Bluetooth earphone according to a control command. Then, when the main user cancels a connection with the Bluetooth earphone and sends a text message “I will connect again later,” the electronic device 100 may obtain corresponding feedback information, e.g., “cancel connection with Bluetooth earphone and send text message.”; Examiner’s Note: Based on the user’s notification acknowledgement action, the keyword can be determined.).
32. With regard to claim 10, Yun further teaches:
wherein the reconstructing of the notification message includes, based on a preset user command being input to an inputter:
reconstructing the notification message by highlighting the at least one keyword, or omitting the notification message except for the at least one keyword (Fig. 1; Fig. 5A; Fig. 5B; Col. 7, lines 16-39, For example, in a case in which the information relating to the event includes information relating to a concert ticket reservation and the context information includes information relating to a user present near the electronic device 100, the external server 200 may obtain output information for the event by using the second model. In a case in which a user is present alone in a living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may, as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 1, use the second model to obtain output information for the event of “You've got a mail from ‘Inxxxpark’, notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30 pm on October 15th.” In other words, in a case in which a user is present alone, the external server 200 may obtain output information including details of specific contents included in the event. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may obtain output information relating to the event of “You've got an e-mail from ‘Inxxxpark’” as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 1, using the second model. In other words, in a case in which the user is present together with another person, the external server 200 may obtain output information including brief or less information about the event reception itself; Examiner’s Note: Part of the message is omitted, besides the keyword, based on whether the user is alone or not.).
33. With regard to claim 11, Yun teaches:
An electronic device, comprising:
a communicator configured to receive, from a servicer device, a notification message and keyword metadata corresponding to an event occurrence of an external electronic device (Col. 5, lines 52-63, First, an electronic device may receive a signal for sensing an event for providing information (e.g., an alarm event) from an external source. For example, as illustrated in section (a) of FIG. 1, the electronic device may receive, from an external source, a signal for sensing an event 10 that an e-mail for reserving a concert ticket is received. The event may be implemented as a variety of events such as a text message reception event, a call reception event, an information request reception event, a social networking service (SNS) reception or notification event, a chat service reception or notification event, a pushed notification event, and the like, in addition to the e-mail reception event.);
an inputter configured to receive a user command from a user (Co1. 2, lines 42-56, The method includes: based on an occurrence of an event for outputting information being identified, obtaining data for identifying a context corresponding to the electronic device; inputting the obtained data to a first model trained by an artificial intelligence algorithm and obtaining, based on the inputting of the obtained data to the first model, information about a person located in a vicinity of the electronic device; inputting the obtained information about the person and information about the event to a second model trained by an artificial intelligence algorithm; obtaining, based on the inputting of the obtained information about the person and the information about the event to the second model, output information corresponding to the event; and providing the obtained output information.);
a screen (Col. 10, lines 65 – Col. 11, lines 4. The display 120 may provide various screens. In particular, the display 110 may display output information for an event. The display 110 may display the output information for the event in the form of a pop-up window. However, this is only an example, and the output information for the alarm event may be displayed in a full-screen mode or in a notification region or bar of the screen.);
and a controller configured to:
determine contextual information of the user based on a notification acknowledgement action being input from the user (Col. 5, lines 64 – Col. 6, lines 19, When a signal for sensing an event is received, the electronic device 100 may obtain peripheral context information of the electronic device 100. For example, the electronic device 100 may obtain data for sensing a peripheral context of the electronic device 100 or data stored in the electronic device 100 (e.g., schedule data, etc.) by use of a sensor provided in the electronic device 100 (e.g., a camera, a GPS sensor, etc.). It is understood, however, that this is only an example, and one or more other embodiments may not be limited thereto. For example, the electronic device 100 may obtain data for sensing a peripheral context of the electronic device 100 from an external device (e.g., IoT device, etc.) interlocked with or communicably connected to the electronic device 100. The context information may be information relating to a space in which the electronic device 100 is located or information relating to a user who uses the electronic device 100, which may include information relating to at least one user present in a space in which the electronic device 100 is located. However, this is only an example, and the context information may include information relating to a user schedule, information relating to a location at which the electronic device 100 is located, and the like; Col. 6, lines 59 – Col. 7, lines 5; The external server 200 may output information for an event based on the information relating to the event and the obtained context information. In detail, the external server 200 may input information relating to the received event and the obtained context information to a second model trained by an artificial intelligence model and obtain output information for the event. The second model may be a model that is trained to obtain output information for the event by using the information relating to the event and the context information (or data for obtaining context information) as input data, which may be retrained by feedback information input by a user. In addition, the output information for the event may be information that includes at least a part of the context included in the event and information relating to the event.),
determine at least one keyword that that corresponds to the determined contextual information (Fig. 1; Fig. 5A; Fig. 5B; Col. 7, lines 16-39, For example, in a case in which the information relating to the event includes information relating to a concert ticket reservation and the context information includes information relating to a user present near the electronic device 100, the external server 200 may obtain output information for the event by using the second model. In a case in which a user is present alone in a living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may, as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 1, use the second model to obtain output information for the event of “You've got a mail from ‘Inxxxpark’, notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30 pm on October 15th.” In other words, in a case in which a user is present alone, the external server 200 may obtain output information including details of specific contents included in the event. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may obtain output information relating to the event of “You've got an e-mail from ‘Inxxxpark’” as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 1, using the second model. In other words, in a case in which the user is present together with another person, the external server 200 may obtain output information including brief or less information about the event reception itself; Examiner’s Note: Keywords included in the notification are determined based on the contextual information of whether the user is together with another person are not. When the user is alone, the notification includes “notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30pm on October 15th.” Whereas, when the user is with their parents, the notification is shorted to ‘You’ve got an e-mail from ‘lnxxxpark’’. This indicates a change in keywords based contextual information.), and
based on the determined at least one keyword and the determined contextual information:
maintain the notification message and control the screen to display the maintained notification message, or reconstruct the notification message and control the screen to display the reconstructed notification message (Fig. 1; Fig. 5A; Fig. 5B; Col. 7, lines 16-39, For example, in a case in which the information relating to the event includes information relating to a concert ticket reservation and the context information includes information relating to a user present near the electronic device 100, the external server 200 may obtain output information for the event by using the second model. In a case in which a user is present alone in a living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may, as illustrated in section (b) of FIG. 1, use the second model to obtain output information for the event of “You've got a mail from ‘Inxxxpark’, notifying the start of delivery of tickets for Exo concert held in Gocheok Dome at 7:30 pm on October 15th.” In other words, in a case in which a user is present alone, the external server 200 may obtain output information including details of specific contents included in the event. In a case in which parents are present together with the user in the living room in which the electronic device 100 is present, the external server 200 may obtain output information relating to the event of “You've got an e-mail from ‘Inxxxpark’” as illustrated in section (c) of FIG. 1, using the second model. In other words, in a case in which the user is present together with another person, the external server 200 may obtain output information including brief or less information about the event reception itself.).
Although Yun teaches the concept of keywords by extracting important information for a notification, but changing the information based on contextual information, Cassidy is brought into further define this concept as a “keyword”.
In analogous art, Cassidy teaches:
[0013] For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yun with the teachings of Cassidy of keywords. Yun teaches of reconstructing notifications based on contextual information. These notifications still contain keywords. For example, an email notification may contain the keywords of “You have received an email,” but the details change based on contextual information (see at least Col. 7, lines 16-39). Similarly to Yun, Cassidy teaches displaying a notification and specific keywords based on factors such as displayable area, text and font size, word count, and any other factors that limit an amount of displayable text. By analyzing the notification and identifying keywords, the notification can be presented to the user based on available displayable area so that the user can quickly determine important information. For example, a two page email can be condensed or truncated in a first summarization to a single line to display in an email inbox view and a second summarization condensing the email to four lines could be generated to display as a header or introduction of the email to highlight key points, dates, times, or other information associated with a set of keywords singled out as having a particular importance or relevance, as discussed in Cassidy ([0013]).
34. Regarding claim 12, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 2 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
35. Regarding claim 13, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 3 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
36. Regarding claim 14, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 4 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
37. Regarding claim 15, it is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 5 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AN-AN N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6147. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 ET.
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, AIMEE LI can be reached at (571) 272-4169. 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.
/AN-AN NGOC NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2195
/Aimee Li/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2195
Prosecution Insights