DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's submission filed on 19 December 2025 has been entered. Applicant amended claims 1, 27, and 30. Applicant cancelled claims 15 and 26. Accordingly, claims 1-14, 16-25, and 27-30 remain pending
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the independent claims and the limitation of “displaying a document adding interface in response to receiving an operation performed on the control displayed in the service data creation interface; adding the first online document via the document adding interface; displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface and displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the first online document; wherein the approval-related information comprises a name of each party processing the first item and an opinion about the first item given by each party; wherein the predetermined format comprises an application programming interface link” have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s remaining arguments are not persuasive.
Applicant’s remarks:
Anjum does not disclose the limitations of displaying a service data creation interface and displaying a control in the service data creation interface….and displaying the first online document in a document display area of the service data creation interface.
Examiner’s remarks:
The limitations are presented at a high level of generality and therefore does not prevent the prior art. As disclosed in the office action, Anjum discloses displaying a creation control interface. Figures 5A and 5B disclose different user control interfaces such as an “Edit Submission Interface” as 530 and “Edit Approval Interface” as 570 respectively that creates/provides control for submitting an edited clause for approval and approving or rejected an edited clause in an online document, wherein the controls are the buttons to select.
Anjum also discloses displaying the first online document in a document display area of the service data creation interface, wherein paragraphs 61 and 62 and Figure 5B reference number 560 of Anjum disclose a display viewing area for viewing the document such as sales agreement document as shown in Figure 5B.The display viewing area of the document in the document view area 510 of the service data creation interface ( recall above Figures 5A and 5B disclose different user service data creation interfaces such as an “Edit Submission Interface” as 530 and “Edit Approval Interface” as 570 respectively. These are service data creation interface because the buttons to approved the edited clause results in a service creation of added edits to the document and the document becomes a revised version document).
Applicant’s remarks:
Anjum does not disclose the limitations of “creating a flow of approving a first item associated with the first online document based on a service data template associated with the service data interface….the first online document carries content required for approving the first item”
Examiner’s remarks:
A flow of approving a first item in a document is merely procedures [flow] for approving the edited content in the document. Paragraph 62 of Anjum discloses the changes to the content of the edited clause are displayed to the reviewing user as disclosed in the office action, The changes are represented by markup, highlighting, or other visual indication. In some embodiments, the edit approval interface also displays further information about the edited clause, such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After the reviewing user has reviewed the edits made by the editing user, the reviewing user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. Therefore, the flow is merely selection of approving or rejecting the edited caused via edit approval interface which is part of the service data creation interface. The first item in Anjum are the edited clause of the document.
Regarding, Applicant’s remarks that Anjum does not meet the claimed display interface that during approving the first item, displays the service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first service area and displays the first online document in its second area: This argument is not persuasive. Anjum discloses in Figure 5B, service data 525 which are permission definition corresponding to the flow of approving the first item/edited clause in a first service area/document viewing area 560. The viewing area is for displaying the online document. In addition, the office action further includes the teachings of Codrington to resolve the deficiencies of Anjum.
Applicant’s remarks:
Anjum does not disclose the limitations of automatically generating approval related information during approval the first item. Anjum’s edit approval interface displays the edits made to the particular clause and other information about the particular clause. Anjum’s information about the particular clause is not the claimed approval related information that is automatically generated during approving the first item…
Examiner’s remarks:
Approval related information can cover a broad range of data during approving the first clause associated with the first online document. Per paragraphs 61-62 and Figure 5B of Anjum, the approval related information 525 can involve the generated or predefined permission definitions during approval of the first item/edited clause. The permission definition reveals editing user(s) that approved the edit, and the awaiting approval from the reviewing user. The reviewing user has been assigned approval permissions for the edited clause. Approval permissions allow a user (such as the reviewing user) to approve modifications or edits made by another user with approved edit permissions for the clause. In FIG. 5B, the editing user's changes to the content of edited clause are displayed to the reviewing user represented by markup, highlighting, or another visual indication. The displayed markup, high lighting, or other visual indication in the edited clause are also approval related information during approval of the edit clause/first item in the online document.
Regarding, Applicant’s remarks that Anjum does not meet the claimed displaying the approval related information at a predetermined area of the first online document in a predetermined format that comprises an API link: Please see the office action, wherein Cheng-Shorland resolves the deficiencies of Anjum.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12-14, 20-25, 27-28 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anjum et al US 20220138690 (hereinafter Anjum), in view of Codrington et al US 20170220546 (hereinafter Codrington), and in further view of Cheng-Shorland et al US 20220405409 (hereinafter Cheng-Shorland).
As to claim 1, Anjum teaches a method for facilitating online collaboration of a first online document (abstract discloses online document system that provide users to participate in online collaborative negotiation of documents stored within in the online document system), comprising:
displaying a service data creation interface (Figures 5A and 5B disclose different user interfaces such as an “Edit Submission Interface” as 530 and “Edit Approval Interface” as 570 respectively) and displaying a control in the service data creation interface (Figure 5A discloses control icon as reference number 535 “Reviewer indication” and Figure 5B discloses the control icon as reference number 575 “Editor Indication”, see also paragraphs 59 and 63. Paragraph 30 also discloses document module 210 (which can also be service data creation interface) of the online document system (ODS) that generate new documents, manage and update documents stored by the ODS, and maintain a record of edits (or other updates) to documents within the ODS. The document module interacts with the user interface module allowing users to provide new documents or modifications to existing documents and to view existing documents (including past versions of document and metadata about document. Paragraph 50 further discloses the user interface module presents a UI to users allowing users to create, view, negotiate, or modify documents);
displaying the first online document in a document display area of the service data creation interface (paragraphs 61 and 62 and Figure 5B reference number 560 disclose a display viewing area for viewing the document such as sales agreement document as shown in Figure 5B.The display viewing area of the document in the document view area 510 of the service data creation interface, recall above Figures 5A and 5B disclose different user service data creation interfaces such as an “Edit Submission Interface” as 530 and “Edit Approval Interface” as 570 respectively);
creating a flow of approving a first item (Figure 5B, reference number 520 is the item/edited clause associated with the document) associated with the first online document (Figure 5B, reference number 560) based on the service data creation interface (Figure 9 disclose the flow or steps of approving the edits of a document by an editing user based on the edit interface/service data creation interface and document module, see paragraph 30. Therefore, the flow is merely selection of approving or rejecting the edited caused via edit approval interface which is part of the service data creation interface. The first item in Anjum are the edited clause of the document), and wherein the first online document is accessible by a plurality of electronic devices to facilitate the online collaboration (paragraphs 23 and 28 disclose user devices are configured to communicate and interact with the online document system. Paragraph 30 discloses the document module interacts with the user interface module allowing users to provide new documents or modifications to existing documents and to view existing documents (including past versions of document and metadata about document. Paragraph 50 further discloses the user interface module presents a UI to users allowing users to create, view, negotiate, or modify documents), and wherein the first online document carries content required for approving the first item (paragraphs 57-59 and 61-62 and Figure 5B. Figure 5B reveals the content associated with the edited clause/first item that has the status of being approved by an editing user);
PNG
media_image1.png
484
697
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 5B of Anjum
…service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item … (Figure 5B reference number 525 reveals service data of permission definition corresponding to the flow of approving 570 in a first area of the display interface) and displaying the first online document in [an] area of the display interface during approving the first online document (paragraphs 61 and 62 and Figure 5B reference number 560 disclose a display viewing area/second area for viewing the document such as sales agreement document as shown in Figure 5B.The display viewing area of the document is different than the display area of the permission definition);
automatically generating approval-related information during approving the first item associated with first online document (paragraph 62 discloses further information is generated and displayed about the edited clause/first item 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document); and
displaying the approval-related information at a predetermined area of the first online document in a predetermined format (paragraph 62 discloses further information is generated and displayed about the edited clause 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B, the user can approve or reject the edits via the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B, the approval related information 525 permission definition is provided at a pre-determined area of the online document in a predetermined arrangement. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document. Paragraph 31 discloses each online document can contain a clause and each clause is associated with a label or identifier and includes content for the clause (such as text, images, formatting, and the like), a position within the content of the document (used, for example, to display the clause in the correct position within the document and for generating a final document)….a clause type, and/or a set of user permissions for the clause. Paragraphs 61-62 and Figure 5B, the approval related information 525 can involve the generated or predefined permission definitions during approval of the first item/edited clause. The permission definition reveals editing user(s) that approved the edit, and the awaiting approval from the reviewing user. The reviewing user has been assigned approval permissions for the edited clause. Approval permissions allow a user (such as the reviewing user) to approve modifications or edits made by another user with approved edit permissions for the clause. In FIG. 5B, the editing user's changes to the content of edited clause are displayed to the reviewing user represented by markup, highlighting, or another visual indication. The displayed markup, high lighting, or other visual indication in the edited clause are also approval related information during approval of the edit clause/first item in the online document).
Anjum does not teach displaying a document adding interface in response to receiving an operation performed on the control displayed in the service data creation interface; adding the first online document via the document adding interface; displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface and displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the first item; wherein the approval-related information comprises a name of each party processing the first item and an opinion about the first item given by each party; wherein the predetermined format comprises an application programming interface link.
Codrington displaying a document adding interface in response to receiving an operation performed on the control displayed in the service data creation interface (paragraph 102 and Figure 4 reveal an import document button for importing/adding a document into the system and a create document button to create a new document in the system. The availability to import/create document is in response to logging into the system. The home screen 400 is part of the service data creation interface and includes various control buttons ); adding the first online document via the document adding interface (paragraph 102 and Figure 4 reveal an import document button where a user select a file to import a file from a local system or from a remote drive mapped to the system) and displaying the first online document in a document display area of the service creation interface (paragraphs 119-120 and Figure 20 reveal reference number 1408 document panel portion for displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface of the service creation interface. The home screen 400 is part of the service data creation interface and includes various control buttons); displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface (paragraph 118 and Figures 14-15 and 20 reveal a revision panel for displaying service data such as revisions to the first item/content in a first area/right column side of the displaying interface) and displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the first item (paragraphs 119-120 and Figure 20 reveal reference number 1408 document panel portion for displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface with the option/during approval of liking/accepting the edit portions ); wherein the approval-related information comprises a name of each party processing the first item and an opinion about the first item given by each party (paragraph 123 and Figure 20, reference number 1428A shows revisions of the content/first item by Mary and a like icon for an opinion of the revision/edit).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify display area in Anjum’s teachings of facilitating online collaboration of online documents with Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document to provide document collaboration and consolidation tools to create a living electronic document and automatically store a history of changes to the living electronic document over time in the centralized location; and to provide/store revisions to documents without losing previous versions (paragraphs 2-4 of Codrington).
The combination of Anjum in view of Codrington does not teach, but Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein the predetermined format comprises an application programming interface link (paragraph 126 disclose via the API, document linking system may provide a GUI for accepting a document. Therefore the approval/accepting related information is in a predefined format according to the GUI. This GUI is further described with reference to FIG. 6. After receiving the document, document linking system may generate a document link to be inserted into the message managed by document delivery system ).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anjum’s teachings of facilitating online collaboration of online documents in view of Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document with Cheng-Shorland’s teachings of an API link to provided improved management of the dissemination of documents with reduced number of controls. The plugin, widget, and/or graphical user interface , implemented into document delivery systems to streamline the document generation, document delivery, and document dissemination process, allow a user to quickly generate a document using fewer GUI interactions. The reduction of interactions may aid in reducing wasted computational resources or unnecessary web navigation. Further, the plugin may aid in reducing network traffic due to the reduced number of interactions. The document linking system may also reduce the number of user interactions and computational transactions while also reducing network traffic (paragraph 11 of Cheng-Shorland).
As to claim 2, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches further comprising: performing first processing on the first online document according to at least one of: an identification, a type, or information related to a service node of a first application (Anjum: paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause[in the document, see Figures 5A/B] including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document. Paragraph 32 reveals the clause types represents an area of relevance, such as legal, administrative, or finance clause types, can represent individual product or services (for example a series of clause types covering specific families of products or services associated with an entity), or can represent other information about the clause, such as a level of secrecy of the contained information (for example a “sensitive information” clause type). Clause types can also be used to represent a specific format or purpose of a clause, for example a “legal jurisdiction” clause type indicating a clause outlining what country or state laws a contract or agreement is being made under, or a “service description” clause type indicating a clause describing services to be provided or bought. In some embodiments, the ODS uses logic rules based on clause types to assign viewing and editing permissions for clauses associated with one or more clause types).
As to claim 3, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein the method further comprises at least one of: processing at least one of display information, permission information or carried content data of the first online document according to a service node of a first application; processing at least one of a displayable content, a display format, and permission information of the first online document for a person associated with a service node of a first application according to information of the person; or generating the first online document or processing the carried content data of the first online document according to first application data associated with a service node of a first application (Anjum: paragraph 62 discloses further information is processed/generated and displayed about the edited clause 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B, the user can approve or reject the edits via the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B the approval related information 525 permission definition is provided at a pre-determined area of the online document in a predetermined arrangement. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document).
As to claim 4, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein processing permission information of the first online document comprises at least one of: (a) in response to establishing the association, or processing the first online document with the first application, assigning ownership of the first online document to the first application; (b) after performing the first processing on the first online document, assigning ownership of the first online document to a creator of service data of the first application, or assigning the ownership to an owner of the first online document who is an owner before establishing the association between the first online document and the first application; or (c) assigning ownership of the first online document to a predetermined person after associating the first online document with an archive address of a document storage center; or (d) adjusting the permission information related to the first online document according to a service node and/or an operation type of an operation of an associated person of the service node (Anjum: paragraphs 42-43 disclose permissions module also includes permissions which allow users to modify/adjust the permissions granted to other users of the online document according to clause type. For example, administrator permissions or “locking” permissions allowing a user to prevent other users from editing the clause (by assigning them the “locked permission).
As to claim 5, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein adjusting the permission information related to the first online document according to a service node and/or an operation type of an operation of an associated person of the service node comprises at least one of: in response to a first processing of a current service node, modifying an owner of the first online document; in response to a second processing of the current service node, withdrawing a predetermined document permission of the associated person of a predetermined processing node; in response to a third processing of a current service node, assigning a corresponding permission of the first online document to a second person based on a permission for the first online document of a first person, and retaining the permission for the first online document of the first person, or withdrawing the permission for the first online document of the first person, or changing the permission for the first online document of the first person, the first person comprises a person associated with the current service node, and the second person comprises a person associated with the third processing; or in response to a fourth processing of the current service node, assigning a predetermined document permission for a person associated with the fourth processing (Anjum: paragraphs 42-43 disclose permissions module also includes permissions which allow users to modify/adjust the permissions granted to other users of the online document according to clause type. For example, administrator permissions or “locking” permissions allowing a user to prevent other users from editing the clause (by assigning them the “locked permission” which is fourth processing).
As to claim 6, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein adjusting the permission information related to the first online document according to a service node and/or an operation type of an operation of an associated person of the service node comprises at least one of: in response to a creator of service data withdrawing a processing request for the service data of the first application, assigning ownership of the first online document to the creator, or to an owner of the first online document before establishing the association between the first online document and the first application; or, in response to an associated person of the service node rejecting processing request for the service data of the first application, withdrawing a permission for the first online document of the associated person of the service node; or, in response to the associated person of the service node transferring the service data of the first application to another person, assigning, based on a permission of the associated person of the service node for the first online document, a corresponding document permission to the another person; or, in response to the associated person of a first service node adding a second service node, assigning a corresponding document permission for an associated person of the added second service node based on the permission for the first online document of the associated person of the first service node; or, in response to a service node being removed, withdrawing or changing the permission for the first online document of the associated person of the removed service node; or, in response to the associated person of a third service node rolling a processing flow back to a previous service node before the service node, assigning a corresponding document permission for an associated person of the previous service node; or, in response to the service data of the first application being copied or shared to a third person, assigning a predetermined permission for the first online document to the third person (Anjum: paragraphs 42-43 disclose permissions module also includes permissions which allow users to modify/adjust the permissions granted to other users of the online document according to clause type. For example, administrator permissions or “locking” permissions allowing a user to prevent other users from editing the clause, when the online document is shared/viewed by other users).
As to claim 7, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein adjusting the permission information related to the first online document according to a service node and/or an operation type of an operation of an associated person of the service node comprises at least one of: in response to a creator of the service data withdrawing a processing request for the service data of the first application, withdrawing a permission for the first online document of an associated person of a service node associated with the processing request; or, in response to a creator of the service data withdrawing the processing request for the service data of the first application, resetting a permission for the first online document, or, in response to an associated person of a service node rejecting the processing request for the service data of the first application, assigning ownership of the first online document to the creator of the service data, or to an owner of the first online document before establishing the association between the first online document and the first application; or, in response to an associated person of a service node transferring the service data of the first application to another person, assigning a corresponding document permission to the another based on a permission for the first online document of the associated person of the service node, the document permission assigned to the another person being the permission for the first online document of the associated person of the service node, or the document permission assigned to the another person being a subset of the permission for the first online document of the associated person of the service node; or, in response to the associated person of a service node adding an additional service node, retaining or changing a permission for the first online document of the associated person of the service node; or, in response to service data of the first application being copied or shared to a third person, assigning a predetermined permission for the first online document to the third person, the predetermined permission being a permission to view (Anjum: paragraphs 42-43 disclose permissions module also includes permissions which allow users to modify/adjust the permissions granted to other users of the online document according to clause type. For example, administrator permissions or “locking” permissions allowing a user to prevent other users from editing the clause, when the online document is shared/viewed by other users).
As to claim 8, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein during approving the first online document, an associated person in a current service node who has a permission to edit for the first online document can edit the first online document (Anjum: paragraph 42 discloses the permission module can assign permissions to view, edit and approve edits to modify document and editing permissions include “full edit” permissions granting a user the ability to make and save changes to the content of the clause, “approved edit” permissions allowing a user to make edits which are not incorporated into the clause until another user approves the proposed changes (for example, a user with “approval” permissions for the edited clause), and a “pre-approved edit” permission which allows a user to switch a clause between prewritten stock forms of a clause), and an associated person who is not in the current service node or has no permission to edit for the first online document cannot edit the first online document (Anjum: paragraphs 42-43 disclose permissions module also includes permissions which allow users to modify/adjust the permissions granted to other users of the online document according to clause type. For example, administrator permissions or “locking” permissions allowing a user to prevent other users from editing the clause, when the online document is shared/viewed by other users).
As to claim 9, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches comprises at least one of: wherein a validity period of a permission of for the first online document of an associated person of the service node is related to a duration of the service node, or within a processing period of the service node, the permission for the first online document assigned to the associated person of the service node to is valid, or outside the processing period of the service node, the permission for the first online document assigned to the associated person of the service node to is invalid or changed to another permission; or a permission for the first online document is assigned to an associated person of the service node by at least one of: adding the associated person of the service node as a collaborator of the first online document and assigning a predetermined permission (Anjum: paragraphs 42-43 disclose permissions module also includes permissions which allow users to modify/adjust the permissions granted to other users of the online document according to clause type. For example, administrator permissions or “locking” permissions allowing a user to prevent other users from editing the clause, when the online document is shared/viewed by other users. Paragraph 60 discloses the edits can be further submitted for review by an additional reviewing user associated with a different entity); or, enabling a link sharing function of the first online document, the link sharing function used to indicate that a user obtaining a sharing link of the first online document has a predetermined permission; or a user obtaining the sharing link accessing the first online document according to an access restriction condition of the link sharing (paragraph 28 discloses multiple users may log into a personal account to access the online document system. Paragraph 75 discloses once the user in the system, the user can request to view the document. Based on permissions definitions associated with the document, clauses of the document are accessed by the online document system (ODS). For example, in response to a request by a viewing user to view the document. If the viewing user has permission to view the document, the ODS generates an interface and provides the document for display to the viewing user. The viewing user can request to make one or more edits or changes to a target clause of the document based on the current permission definitions associated with the clause, the ODS can determine if the viewing user can edit the target clause as request. Paragraphs 41 and 45 reveal permissions are initially assigned at the time a document is created and can later be further modified by the document creator/owner (or another authorized user). The permissions for other user provide restriction conditions upon user login information).
As to claim 10, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein a user obtaining the sharing link accessing the first online document according to an access restriction condition of the link sharing (see claim 9 above) comprises: if an attribute of the user obtaining the sharing link satisfies a predetermined condition, enabling the user obtaining the sharing link to access the first online document (Anjum: paragraph 28 discloses multiple users may log into a personal account to access the online document system. Paragraph 21 reveals the ODS can assign varying permissions to individual users, groups of users, or entities which can control which documents a user can interact with and what level of control the user has over the documents they have access to. Paragraph 75 discloses once the user in the system, the user can request to view the document. Based on permissions definitions associated with the document, clauses of the document are accessed by the online document system (ODS). For example, in response to a request by a viewing user to view the document. If the viewing user has permission to view the document, the ODS generates an interface and provides the document for display to the viewing user. The viewing user can request to make one or more edits or changes to a target clause of the document based on the current permission definitions associated with the clause, the ODS can determine if the viewing user can edit the target clause as request. Paragraphs 41 and 45 reveal permissions are initially assigned at the time a document is created and can later be further modified by the document creator/owner (or another authorized user). The permissions for other user provide restriction conditions upon user login information).
As to claim 12, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein content data carried by the first online document includes processing abstract information for characterizing information related to the service processing (Anjum: paragraph 31 discloses each online document can contain a clause which refers to a defined subset of a document (such as a section, paragraph, or contract clause. A document can be split into clauses at the time the document is created in or imported into the ODS. In some implementations, each clause is associated with a label or identifier and includes content for the clause (such as text, images, formatting, and the like), a position within the content of the document (used, for example, to display the clause in the correct position within the document and for generating a final document), a version history recording changes to the clause, a clause state (such as “agreed” or “unnegotiated”), a clause type, and/or a set of user permissions for the clause. Paragraph 34 discloses clauses of a document can be assigned one or more clause types used to categorizing the clause within a document and between documents managed by the ODS; ODS can include clause types representing an area of relevance, such as legal, administrative, or finance clause types, can represent individual product or services (for example a series of clause types covering specific families of products or services associated with an entity), or can represent other information about the clause, such as a level of secrecy of the contained information (for example a “sensitive information” clause type). Clause types can also be used to represent a specific format or purpose of a clause, for example a “legal jurisdiction” clause type indicating a clause outlining what country or state laws a contract or agreement is being made under, or a “service description” clause type indicating a clause describing services to be provided or bought. In some embodiments, the ODS uses logic rules based on clause types to assign viewing and editing permissions for clauses associated with one or more clause types).
As to claim 13, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein the information related to the service processing characterized by the processing abstract information comprises at least one of: a link of the processing node or the first application, processing progress information, processing time information, handler information, or document change record information of the first online document (Anjum: paragraph 31 discloses clause of an online document can include version history recording changes to the clause, a clause state (such as “agreed” or “unnegotiated”), a clause type, and/or a set of user permissions for the clause).
As to claim 14, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein processing carried content data of the first online document according to a service node of the first application comprises: updating the processing abstract information according to a processing operation of the service data by an associated person of the service node of the first application; displaying the processing abstract information or a link to the processing abstract information within the first online document; or, displaying, within the first online document, a portion of the processing abstract information for which an associated person of a current service node has a permission to view (Anjum: paragraph 31 discloses each online document can contain a clause which refers to a defined subset of a document (such as a section, paragraph, or contract clause. A document can be split into clauses at the time the document is created in or imported into the ODS. In some implementations, each clause is associated with a label or identifier and includes content for the clause (such as text, images, formatting, and the like), a position within the content of the document (used, for example, to display the clause in the correct position within the document and for generating a final document), a version history recording changes to the clause, a clause state (such as “agreed” or “unnegotiated”), a clause type, and/or a set of user permissions for the clause); or, displaying a second document or a link to a second document within the first online document, the second document recording the processing abstract information; or, upon completion of the first processing of the first online document, displaying the processing abstract information within the first online document.
As to claim 20, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches further comprising at least one of: in response to a creation operation, setting a service node of a first application and a document permission of an associated person of the service node (Anjum: paragraph 31 discloses when a document is created it is split into clauses, and each clause is associated with a label or identifier and includes content for the clause such as set of user permissions for the clause); or creating a service data template having a control for adding an online document, all or part of service data of the first application established based on the service data template (Anjum: paragraph 46 discloses template module can manage one or more templates for added documents, clauses, or other content for an entity. Templates managed by the template module can include document content (service data of the online document system application) and clauses common to documents generated using the template (for example, formatted document text, images, or embedded video or clauses containing the same), template permission definitions for assigning permissions to documents created using the template, and/or workflows, logic, or other rules controlling documents created with the template. See also paragraphs 47-48).
As to claim 21, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein the document permission of the associated person of the service node is set according to at least one of: a function of the service node, a role of the associated person, a type of the first online document, or a type of the first application (Anjum: paragraph 49 discloses templates can include pre-assigned default permissions naming specific users (or groups of users). For example, a template for a sales contract may include a default permission definition granting editing permissions to members of the sales team (one or more internal users) who typically negotiate such contracts. Similarly, a template can include one or more permission roles associated with permission definitions (but not naming an applicable user), for example, roles for a supervisor who approves changes, and one or more lower level client contacts/engineers who may actively communicate with another entity in the negotiation. In some implementations, the permission roles can be assigned to users (or groups of users) at the time the document is created. For example, the template for the sales contract could include predefined permission definitions for the roles of “supervisor,” “legal expert,” and “product expert” which can be assigned to appropriate users when a document is created from the template).
As to claim 22, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein information related to a service node of a first application comprises at least one of: a service node, information of an associated person of the service node, or service data associated with the service node (Anjum: paragraph 19 discloses with regard to the service node of negotiations and a negotiation workflow can control which users can make edits to the document and may define actions which require further approval (either by another entity in the negotiation or by a trusted user) to be incorporated into the final negotiated document. The online document system allows entities to agree on documents (or individual clauses) as intermediate steps in a negotiation (service node) and can provide information on the current state of a negotiation to relevant users (such as version histories of negotiated clauses- service data associated with the service node); and
wherein if there is a first person associated with two or more service nodes of the first application; after the first person has processed the first online document at an associated first service node, and before a start of a second service node associated with the first person that has not started, if content of the first online document changes, the first person needs to process the first online document at the second service node; or, after the first person processes the first online document at the associated first service node and before a start of a second service node associated with the first person, if the content of the first online document has no change, the first person has no need to process the first online document at the second service node (Anjum: paragraphs 24 and 36 disclose each entity participating in a negotiation can make changes to an entity-specific version of a document or clause based on permissions granted to users associated with that entity. At some point, the entity can propose changes to the official version of the document or clause (for example, based on their changes to the internal version) which are then visible to other entities in the negotiation. In some implementations, proposed changes to an official version are not saved until accepted by one or more other entities than the entity proposing the changes. Paragraph 35 also discloses when changes are made to an internal (entity-specific) version of a clause the official version is not changed, allowing entities to internally refine the document or clause without exposing working versions to other entities. Therefore, first person internally works/edits the online document, the first persons process the edits and the process of negotiation/approval of the edits is made to first or other persons before the first and/other persons make additional edits on the online documents according to the defined permissions).
As to claim 23, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches determining whether the content of the first online document changes based on a version number of the first online document, if the version number of the first online document changes, it is determined that the content of the first online document changes, or if the version number of the first online document has no change, it is determined that the content of the first online document has no change (Anjum: paragraph 35 discloses when changes are made to an internal (entity-specific) version of a clause the official version is not changed, allowing entities to internally refine the document or clause without exposing working versions to other entities. Paragraph 31 discloses each online document can contain a clause each clause is associated with a version history recording changes to the clause, a clause state (such as “agreed” or “unnegotiated”), a clause type, and/or a set of user permissions for the clause).
As to claim 24, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein a first application comprises a standalone application, an embedded or other program-based subroutine, or an applet; or wherein the method further comprises displaying the service data of a first application associated with the first online document in a target communication software associated with a service node of the first application (Anjum: paragraph 28 discloses a user device executes an application allowing the user to interact with the online document system. For example, a user device can execute a browser application to enable interaction between the user device and the ODS via the network. A single user can be associated with multiple user devices, in some embodiments. Similarly, one user device can be shared between multiple users who may, for example, log into a personal account on the user device to access the online document system).
As to claim 25, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein the method comprises: processing the service data in response to an operation on the first online document displayed by the target communication software (Anjum: paragraph 28 discloses a user device executes an application allowing the user to interact with the online document system. For example, a user device can execute a browser application to enable interaction between the user device and the ODS via the network. A single user can be associated with multiple user devices, in some embodiments. Similarly, one user device can be shared between multiple users who may, for example, log into a personal account on the user device to access the online document system. Paragraph 62 discloses further information is processed/generated and displayed about the edited clause 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B, the user can approve or reject the edits via the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B the approval related information 525 permission definition is provided at a pre-determined area of the online document in a predetermined arrangement. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document) .
As to claim 27, Anjum teaches a method for facilitating online collaboration of an online document (abstract discloses online document system that provide users to participate in online collaborative negotiation of documents stored within in the online document system), comprising:
creating a service data template in response to a first creation event, wherein the service data template provides a control (paragraph 46 discloses template module can manage one or more templates for added documents, clauses, or other content for an entity. Templates managed by the template module can include document content (service data of the online document system application) and clauses common to documents generated using the template (for example, formatted document text, images, or embedded video or clauses containing the same), template permission definitions (controls) for assigning permissions to documents created using the template, and/or workflows, logic, or other rules controlling documents created with the template. See also paragraphs 47-48);
generating a service form or a service flow of approving an item associated with the online document based on the service data template (Figure 9 discloses the flow/steps of approving the edits of a document by an editing user based on the edit interface/service data creation interface. Therefore, the flow is merely selection of approving or rejecting the edited caused via edit approval interface which is part of the service data creation interface.), wherein the generating a service form or a service flow comprises adding the online document to the service form or the service flow (paragraph 30 discloses the document module interacts with the user interface module allowing users to provide new documents or modifications to existing documents and to view existing documents (including past versions of document and metadata about document. Paragraph 50 further discloses the user interface module presents a UI to users allowing users to create, view, negotiate, or modify documents), wherein the online document is accessible by electronic devices to facilitate the online collaboration (paragraphs 23 and 28 disclose user devices are configured to communicate and interact with the online document system. Paragraph 30 discloses the document module interacts with the user interface module allowing users to provide new documents or modifications to existing documents and to view existing documents (including past versions of document and metadata about document). Paragraph 50 further discloses the user interface module presents a UI to users allowing users to create, view, negotiate, or modify documents);
processing the service form or the service flow by an application (paragraph 28 discloses a user device executes an application allowing the user to interact with the online document system. For example, a user device can execute a browser application to enable interaction between the user device and the ODS via the network) based on a service logic of the application (paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause[in the document, see Figures 5A/B] including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document. Paragraph 32 reveals the clause types represents an area of relevance, such as legal, administrative, or finance clause types, can represent individual product or services (for example a series of clause types covering specific families of products or services associated with an entity), or can represent other information about the clause, such as a level of secrecy of the contained information (for example a “sensitive information” clause type). Clause types can also be used to represent a specific format or purpose of a clause, for example a “legal jurisdiction” clause type indicating a clause outlining what country or state laws a contract or agreement is being made under, or a “service description” clause type indicating a clause describing services to be provided or bought. In some embodiments, the ODS uses logic rules based on clause types to assign viewing and editing permissions for clauses associated with one or more clause types);
service data corresponding to the flow of approving the item … (Figure 5B reference number 525 reveals service data of permission definition corresponding to the flow of approving 570 in a first area of the display interface) and displaying the online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the item associated with the online document (paragraphs 61 and 62 and Figure 5B reference number 560 disclose a display viewing area/second area for viewing the document such as sales agreement document as shown in Figure 5B.The display viewing area of the document is different than the display area of the permission definition);
automatically generating approval-related information during approving the online document (paragraph 62 discloses further information is generated and displayed about the edited clause 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document); and
displaying the approval-related information at a predetermined area of the online document in a predetermined format (paragraph 62 discloses further information is generated and displayed about the edited clause 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B, the user can approve or reject the edits via the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B the approval related information 525 permission definition is provided at a pre-determined area of the online document in a predetermined arrangement. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document. Paragraph 31 discloses each online document can contain a clause and each clause is associated with a label or identifier and includes content for the clause (such as text, images, formatting, and the like), a position within the content of the document (used, for example, to display the clause in the correct position within the document and for generating a final document)….a clause type, and/or a set of user permissions for the clause. Paragraphs 61-62 and Figure 5B, the approval related information 525 can involve the generated or predefined permission definitions during approval of the first item/edited clause. The permission definition reveals editing user(s) that approved the edit, and the awaiting approval from the reviewing user. The reviewing user has been assigned approval permissions for the edited clause. Approval permissions allow a user (such as the reviewing user) to approve modifications or edits made by another user with approved edit permissions for the clause. In FIG. 5B, the editing user's changes to the content of edited clause are displayed to the reviewing user represented by markup, highlighting, or another visual indication. The displayed markup, high lighting, or other visual indication in the edited clause are also approval related information during approval of the edit clause/first item in the online document).
Anjum does not teach displaying a document adding interface for adding the online document in response to receiving an operation performed on the control provided by the service data template; adding the online document via the document adding interface; displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface and displaying the online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the item associated with first online document; wherein the approval-related information comprises a name of each party processing the first item and an opinion about the first item given by each party; wherein the predetermined format comprises an application programming interface link.
Codrington displaying a document adding interface for adding the online document in response to receiving an operation performed on the control provided by the service data template (paragraph 102 and Figure 4 reveal an import document button for importing/adding a document into the system and a create document button to create a new document in the system. The availability to import/add document is in response to login in to the system. The home screen 400 is part of the service data template and includes various control buttons ); adding the first online document via the document adding interface (paragraph 102 and Figure 4 reveal import document button/interface where a user select a file to import a file from a local system or from a remote drive mapped to the system) and displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface (paragraphs 119-120 and Figure 20 reveal reference number 1408 document panel portion for displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface of the service creation interface. The home screen 400 is part of the service data creation interface and includes various control buttons); displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface (paragraph 118 and Figures 14-15 and 20 reveal a revision panel for displaying service data such as revisions to the first item/content in a first area/right column side of the displaying interface) and displaying the online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the item associated with first online document (paragraphs 119-120 and Figure 20 reveal reference number 1408 document panel portion for displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface with the option/during approval of liking/accepting the edit portions); wherein the approval-related information comprises a name of each party processing the first item and an opinion about the first item given by each party (paragraph 123 and Figure 20, reference number 1428A shows revisions of the content/first item by Mary and a like icon for an opinion of the revision/edit).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify display area in Anjum’s teachings of facilitating online collaboration of online documents with Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document to provide document collaboration and consolidation tools to create a living electronic document and automatically store a history of changes to the living electronic document over time in the centralized location; and to provide/store revisions to documents without losing previous versions (paragraphs 2-4 of Codrington).
The combination of Anjum in view of Codrington does not teach, but Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein the predetermined format comprises an application programming interface link (paragraph 126 disclose via the API, document linking system may provide a GUI for accepting a document. Therefore the approval/accepting related information is in a predefined format according to the GUI. This GUI is further described with reference to FIG. 6. After receiving the document, document linking system may generate a document link to be inserted into the message managed by document delivery system ).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anjum’s teachings of facilitating online collaboration of online documents in view of Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document with Cheng-Shorland’s teachings of an API link to provided improved management of the dissemination of documents with reduced number of controls. The plugin, widget, and/or graphical user interface , implemented into document delivery systems to streamline the document generation, document delivery, and document dissemination process, allow a user to quickly generate a document using fewer GUI interactions. The reduction of interactions may aid in reducing wasted computational resources or unnecessary web navigation. Further, the plugin may aid in reducing network traffic due to the reduced number of interactions. The document linking system may also reduce the number of user interactions and computational transactions while also reducing network traffic (paragraph 11 of Cheng-Shorland).
As to claim 28, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein creating a service data template in response to a first creation event comprises: in response to a permission setting event, determining an operation permission for the online document of a person associated with a service processing node of the service data template, the operation permission applied to all online document added via the control of the service data template (Anjum: paragraph 46 discloses template module can manage one or more templates for added documents, clauses, or other content for an entity. Templates managed by the template module can include document content (service data of the online document system application) and clauses common to documents generated using the template (for example, formatted document text, images, or embedded video or clauses containing the same), template permission definitions (controls) for assigning permissions to documents created using the template, and/or workflows, logic, or other rules controlling documents created with the template. See also paragraphs 47-48. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause[in the document, see Figures 5A/B] including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document. Paragraph 32 reveals the clause types represents an area of relevance, such as legal, administrative, or finance clause types, can represent individual product or services (for example a series of clause types covering specific families of products or services associated with an entity), or can represent other information about the clause, such as a level of secrecy of the contained information (for example a “sensitive information” clause type). Clause types can also be used to represent a specific format or purpose of a clause, for example a “legal jurisdiction” clause type indicating a clause outlining what country or state laws a contract or agreement is being made under, or a “service description” clause type indicating a clause describing services to be provided or bought. In some embodiments, the ODS uses logic rules based on clause types to assign viewing and editing permissions for clauses associated with one or more clause types).
As to claim 30, Anjum teaches a terminal of facilitating online collaboration of a first online document (abstract discloses online document system that provide users to participate in online collaborative negotiation of documents stored within in the online document system), comprising:
at least one memory and at least one processor, wherein the at least one memory is configured to store program code, and the at least one processor is configured to call the program code stored in the at least one memory to execute acts (paragraph 80-81 disclose comprising a non-transitory, tangible computer readable storage medium, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions executed by a computer processor for performing any or all of the steps, operations, or processes described);
displaying a service data creation interface (Figures 5A and 5B disclose different user interfaces such as an “Edit Submission Interface” as 530 and “Edit Approval Interface” as 570 respectively) and displaying a control in the service data creation interface (Figure 5A discloses control icon as reference number 535 “Reviewer indication” and Figure 5B discloses the control icon as reference number 575 “Editor Indication”, see also paragraphs 59 and 63. Paragraph 30 also discloses document module 210 of the online document system (ODS) that generate new documents, manage and update documents stored by the ODS, and maintain a record of edits (or other updates) to documents within the ODS. The document module interacts with the user interface module allowing users to provide new documents or modifications to existing documents and to view existing documents (including past versions of document and metadata about document. Paragraph 50 further discloses the user interface module presents a UI to users allowing users to create, view, negotiate, or modify documents);
creating a flow of approving a first item (Figure 5B, reference number 520 is the item/edited clause associated with the document) associated with the first online document (Figure 5B, reference number 560) based on the service data creation interface (Figure 9 disclose the flow or steps of approving the edits of a document by an editing user based on the edit interface/service data creation interface and document module, see paragraph 30. Therefore, the flow is merely selection of approving or rejecting the edited caused via edit approval interface which is part of the service data creation interface. The first item in Anjum are the edited clause of the document), and wherein the first online document is accessible by a plurality of electronic devices to facilitate the online collaboration (paragraphs 23 and 28 disclose user devices are configured to communicate and interact with the online document system. Paragraph 30 discloses the document module interacts with the user interface module allowing users to provide new documents or modifications to existing documents and to view existing documents (including past versions of document and metadata about document. Paragraph 50 further discloses the user interface module presents a UI to users allowing users to create, view, negotiate, or modify documents), and wherein the first online document carries content required for approving the first item (paragraphs 57-59 and 61-62 and Figure 5B. Figure 5B reveals the content associated with the edited clause/first item that has the status of being approved by an editing user);
…service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item … (Figure 5B reference number 525 reveals service data of permission definition corresponding to the flow of approving 570 in a first area of the display interface) and displaying the first online document in [an] area of the display interface during approving the first online document (paragraphs 61 and 62 and Figure 5B reference number 560 disclose a display viewing area/second area for viewing the document such as sales agreement document as shown in Figure 5B.The display viewing area of the document is different than the display area of the permission definition);
automatically generating approval-related information during approving the first item associated with first online document (paragraph 62 discloses further information is generated and displayed about the edited clause/first item 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document); and
displaying the approval-related information at a predetermined area of the first online document in a predetermined format (paragraph 62 discloses further information is generated and displayed about the edited clause 520 such as previous version of the edited clause or related clauses in the document. After user has reviewed the edits made in the online document, the user can approve or reject the edits using the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B, the user can approve or reject the edits via the edit approval interface. As shown in Figure 5B, the approval related information 525 permission definition is provided at a pre-determined area of the online document in a predetermined arrangement. Paragraph 44 discloses permission module can automatically suggest a permission definition for a clause including one or more permissions based on a clause type of the clause, based on one or more known users participating in the negotiation process, or based on other similar characteristics of the clause or document. Paragraph 31 discloses each online document can contain a clause and each clause is associated with a label or identifier and includes content for the clause (such as text, images, formatting, and the like), a position within the content of the document (used, for example, to display the clause in the correct position within the document and for generating a final document)….a clause type, and/or a set of user permissions for the clause. Paragraphs 61-62 and Figure 5B, the approval related information 525 can involve the generated or predefined permission definitions during approval of the first item/edited clause. The permission definition reveals editing user(s) that approved the edit, and the awaiting approval from the reviewing user. The reviewing user has been assigned approval permissions for the edited clause. Approval permissions allow a user (such as the reviewing user) to approve modifications or edits made by another user with approved edit permissions for the clause. In FIG. 5B, the editing user's changes to the content of edited clause are displayed to the reviewing user represented by markup, highlighting, or another visual indication. The displayed markup, high lighting, or other visual indication in the edited clause are also approval related information during approval of the edit clause/first item in the online document).
Anjum does not teach displaying a document adding interface in response to receiving an operation performed on the control displayed in the service data creation interface; adding the first online document via the document adding interface; displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface and displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the first online document; wherein the approval-related information comprises a name of each party processing the first item and an opinion about the first item given by each party; wherein the predetermined format comprises an application programming interface link.
Codrington displaying a document adding interface in response to receiving an operation performed on the control displayed in the service data creation interface (paragraph 102 and Figure 4 reveal an import document button for importing/adding a document into the system and a create document button to create a new document in the system. The availability to import/create document is in response to login in to the system. The home screen 400 is part of the service data creation interface and includes various control buttons ); adding the first online document via the document adding interface (paragraph 102 and Figure 4 reveal import document button where a user select a file to import a file from a local system or from a remote drive mapped to the system) and displaying the first online document in a document display area of the service creation interface (paragraphs 119-120 and Figure 20 reveal reference number 1408 document panel portion for displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface of the service creation interface. The home screen 400 is part of the service data creation interface and includes various control buttons); displaying service data corresponding to the flow of approving the first item in a first area of a display interface (paragraph 118 and Figures 14-15 and 20 reveal a revision panel for displaying service data such as revisions to the first item/content in a first area/right column side of the displaying interface) and displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface during approving the first online document (paragraphs 119-120 and Figure 20 reveal reference number 1408 document panel portion for displaying the first online document in a second area of the display interface with the option/during approval of liking/accepting the edit portions); wherein the approval-related information comprises a name of each party processing the first item and an opinion about the first item given by each party (paragraph 123 and Figure 20, reference number 1428A shows revisions of the content/first item by Mary and a like icon for an opinion of the revision/edit).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify display area in Anjum’s teachings of facilitating online collaboration of online documents with Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document to provide document collaboration and consolidation tools to create a living electronic document and automatically store a history of changes to the living electronic document over time in the centralized location; and to provide/store revisions to documents without losing previous versions (paragraphs 2-4 of Codrington).
The combination of Anjum in view of Codrington does not teach, but Cheng-Shorland teaches wherein the predetermined format comprises an application programming interface link (paragraph 126 disclose via the API, document linking system may provide a GUI for accepting a document. Therefore the approval/accepting related information is in a predefined format according to the GUI. This GUI is further described with reference to FIG. 6. After receiving the document, document linking system may generate a document link to be inserted into the message managed by document delivery system ).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anjum’s teachings of facilitating online collaboration of online documents in view of Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document with Cheng-Shorland’s teachings of an API link to provided improved management of the dissemination of documents with reduced number of controls. The plugin, widget, and/or graphical user interface , implemented into document delivery systems to streamline the document generation, document delivery, and document dissemination process, allow a user to quickly generate a document using fewer GUI interactions. The reduction of interactions may aid in reducing wasted computational resources or unnecessary web navigation. Further, the plugin may aid in reducing network traffic due to the reduced number of interactions. The document linking system may also reduce the number of user interactions and computational transactions while also reducing network traffic (paragraph 11 of Cheng-Shorland).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anjum et al US 20220138690 (hereinafter Anjum), in view of Codrington et al US 20170220546 (hereinafter Codrington), in further view of Cheng-Shorland et al US 20220405409 (hereinafter Cheng-Shorland), and in view of Laverdiere-Papineau et al US 8805741 (hereinafter Laverdiere-Papineau).
As to claim 11, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1 above, but does not teach wherein after performing the first processing on the first online document according to the information related to a service node of a first application, the permission for the first online document of an associated person of the service node is withdrawn.
Laverdiere-Papineau teaches wherein after performing the first processing on the first online document according to the information related to a service node of an application, the permission for the first online document of an associated person of the service node is withdrawn (column 11, lines 30-40 reveals an access assigning module allows assignors to update the assigned access rights of documents, wherein the assignor may provide update instructions(processing). The update instructions may pertain to granting one or more new access rights to the user and revoking(withdrawing) one or more previously granted access rights to the user).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anjum’s teachings of adjusting the permission information for the service processing and displaying the online document that is editable in view of Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document and Cheng-Shorland’s teachings of an API link with Laverdiere-Papineau’s access assigning module that allows an owner of documents to assigns or grant/modify/withdraw access rights of documents to prevent leakage and theft of confidential information by internal and external attackers while controlling access of protected documents (column 1, lines 19-20 and 45-49 of Laverdiere-Papineau).
Claim(s) 16-19 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anjum et al US 20220138690 (hereinafter Anjum), in view of Codrington et al US 20170220546 (hereinafter Codrington), in further view of Cheng-Shorland et al US 20220405409 (hereinafter Cheng-Shorland), and in further view of Qi et al US 20160026676 (hereinafter Qi).
As to claim 16, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1 above. The combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland does not teach, but Qi teaches further comprising displaying the prompt information, the prompt information comprises at least one of: contact information of the owner of the first online document, a service card of the owner of the first online document, a control for contacting the owner of the first online document after being triggered, an entrance for applying to the owner for transferring ownership, or an entrance for applying to the owner for associating the first online document with a first application (Qi: paragraph 99 discloses the system can receive an instruction from a user to browse the application-file association list of an application. The terminal device displays the corresponding application name and a file record associated with the application. display of the application name and corresponding file record make it possible that users of terminal device can view the creator of each file. The users may know the attribution of each file through the display of the application name).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anjum’s teachings of service processing an online document and displaying the online document that is editable in view of Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document and Cheng-Shorland’s teachings of an API link with Qi’s teachings of application file association such that the application is managed according to the application-file association list, thereby reducing requirements of technical cost for users of terminal device, preventing impact of normal operating speed and processing capacity of the terminal device (paragraph 26 of Qi) and improving user experience in management of files and document (paragraph 99 of Qi).
As to claim 17, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington, Cheng-Shorland, and Qi teaches comprising: in response to applying for transferring ownership or applying for associating the first online document with the first application, sending a notification message to the owner, the notification message comprising at least one of: information of the first application, information of the first online document, or remark information of the creator (Qi: paragraph 99 discloses the system can receive an instruction from a user to browse the application-file association list of an application. The terminal device displays the corresponding application name and a file record associated with the application. display of the application name and corresponding file record make it possible that users of terminal device can view the creator of each file. The users may know the attribution of each file through the display of the application name). Motivation is similar to the motivation presented in claim 16.
As to claim 18, The combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1 above. The combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland does not teach, but Qi teaches determining a first archive address associated with a service data template of the first application, wherein the first archive address is an archive address of a document storage center, the first archive address is used to associate with a target online document, the target online document being an online document associated with service data established based on the service data template; associating the first online document with the first archive address at a predetermined timing; or in response to an operation of adding the first online document in the display interface of the first application, displaying an archive address selection page of a document storage center, and associating the first online document with a selected second archive address at a predetermined timing according to the second archive address (paragraph 104 discloses an associated list acquisition module configured to acquire an application file association list, which is obtained from a server by making a statistic according to application information of an application and file operation behavior of the application executed by invoking a system read-write interface reported by a terminal device; paragraphs 59 and 115 reveal the performing of the management on the application according to the application-file association list may further comprise: displaying correspondingly an application name and a file record associated with the application if the application-file association list is checked. Paragraph 73 discloses the association between the application and the file operation behavior may be established by recording the application information and the file operation behavior executed during invocation, thus establishing the association between the application and the files stored in the terminal device. Files corresponding to the file operation behavior of the application may be regarded as files associated with the application).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anjum’s teachings of service processing an online document and displaying the online document that is editable in view of Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document and Cheng-Shorland’s teachings of an API link with Qi’s teachings of application file association such that the application is managed according to the application-file association list, thereby reducing requirements of technical cost for users of terminal device, preventing impact of normal operating speed and processing capacity of the terminal device (paragraph 26 of Qi) and improving user experience in management of files and document (paragraph 99 of Qi).
As to claim 19, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington, Cheng-Shorland, and Qi teaches wherein the predetermined timing comprises reaching or completing a predetermined service node of the first application (Qi: paragraph 54 discloses the managing of an application may include, but not limited to, deleting the application, updating the application into a different version, saving operation data of the application, deactivating the application when the application idles longer than a predetermined time etc. Paragraph 101 further reveals the terminal device may modify the file pathnames/address at the time that the file is generated or at a time when the user provides a requests). Motivation is similar to the motivation presented in claim 18.
As to claim 29, the combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland teaches all the limitations recited in claim 27 above and further teaches creating a service data template in response to a first creation event (see claim 27 above). The combination of Anjum in view of Codrington and Cheng-Shorland does not teach, but Qi teaches wherein creating a service data template comprises: in response to an address setting event, determining a first archive address associated with the service data template (paragraphs 73 and 83 reveal file operation behavior may include file operation and a file pathname. The file pathname may include a storage path of a file. Paragraph 93 reveals application-file association list is generated by the server through statistical analysis according to information of applications and file operation behaviors of the applications. Paragraph 86 disclose that in order to avoid losing track of files, the files may be differentiated according to different versions of the same application for making a statistic. Paragraph 95 discloses the terminal device may query and/or search through the application-file association list according to application information of the first application, finding pathnames of the files saved in the terminal device and corresponding with the application information, and deleting the files from the terminal device); wherein the first archive address is an address of a document storage center, the first archive address is used to associate with a target online document, and the target online document is an online document associated via the control (paragraphs 73 and 83 reveal file operation behavior may include file operation and a file pathname. The file pathname may include a storage path of a file. Paragraph 86 disclose that in order to avoid losing track of files, the files may be differentiated according to different versions of the same application for making a statistic. Paragraph 95 discloses the terminal device may query and/or search through the application-file association list according to application information of the first application, finding pathnames of the files saved in the terminal device and corresponding with the application information, and deleting the files from the terminal device).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anjum’s teachings service data template via statistical modeling and displaying the online document that is editable in view of Codrington’s teachings of two areas of the display interface for displaying the service data and the online document and Cheng-Shorland’s teachings of an API link with Qi’s teachings of a file operation statistical behavior including file operation and a file pathname such that the application is managed according to the application-file association list, thereby reducing requirements of technical cost for users of terminal device, preventing impact of normal operating speed and processing capacity of the terminal device (paragraph 26 of Qi) and improving user experience in management of files and document (paragraph 99 of Qi).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELICIA FARROW whose telephone number is (571)272-1856. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:30am-4:00pm (EST).
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached at (571)270-5143. 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.
/F.F/Examiner, Art Unit 2437
/ALI S ABYANEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2437