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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12/28/2023. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 12 recites the abbreviation UUID for the first time within the claim group 1-7,12 and requires the long equivalent to the abbreviation. For example, universal unique identifiers (UUIDs). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9,15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Weissenberger et al (US Publication No.: 20250149041).
Claim 1, Weissenberger et al discloses
Preamble: A smart home system for smart home functionality awareness, the smart home system comprising:
A natural language processing device (Fig. 1, label 113,114) configured to:
Receive a user command from a user from a natural language input device (Fig. 2, label 252, Fig. 3, label 352. Fig. 4a, label 452);
Decode the user command to determine an input functional semantic identifier (FSID) representing a requested electronic device command (Paragraph 54 discloses ASR models process the spoken utterance to determine an input command such as ASR output and NLU output, where NLU output may include intent(s) determined based on the ASR output, slot values for parameters associated with the intents determined based on the ASR out, etc. A functional semantic identifier representing a requested electronic device are considered information found in the ASR and NLU output. Paragraph 58 discloses an example spoken utterance of “turn off the lights”, the determination of the device “lights” via ASR and NLU indicates an identification, such as FSID representing a requested device. Paragraph 38 discloses ASR metrics and NLU metrices which are determined from processing or decoding the user voice command.); and
A smart home command processing device (Fig. 1, label 113) configured to:
Determine an output FSID representing an existing capability of a smart home system that addresses the requested electronic device command (Paragraph 58 discloses determining fulfillment criteria in order for the assistant to accomplish the user’s spoken utterance or command. The assistant determines the user has not given the assistant permission to software application that is utilized to control the lights. Such disclosure indicates a determination of an output FSID (access to application to control lights and control lights) representing an existing capability of a smart home system (application’s ability to control lights and the assistant’s lack of access to such application) that address the requested electronic device command (fulfillment or addressment of the user’s request of “turn off the lights” (requested electronic device command). Paragraph 38 further discloses fulfillment metrics associated with fulfillment candidates such as fulfillment models or rules needed to generate an output or response to the user’s voice command. Such fulfillment metrics and fulfillment candidates are considered part of the determination of an output FSID representing an existing capability.); and
Determine a recommended capability based on the input FSID (Paragraph 58 discloses “the recommended action can include an indication that the user should grant the automated assistant access to the software application utilized in controlling the lights”. ), the recommended capability for addressing the requested electronic device command (Paragraph 58,59 discloses recommendation of a capability for address (user granting access to the assistant to the application controlling the lights) of a capability for address (controlling the lights).); and
Cause an output device to provide a natural language output response to the user confirming an initiation of the existing capability (Paragraph 59 discloses “the output provided for presentation to the user that includes the recommended action can indicate one or more of how the automated assistant can perform the certain fulfillment of the assistant command to the user confirming an initiation of the existing capability (e.g., “I cannot turn on the lights right now, but I can if you grant me access to the software application utilized to control the lights”), and prompt the user to cause performance of the certain fulfillment of the assistant command (e.g., “would you like to grant me access?”).” Such response indicates an initiation (start) of the existing capability (access granting to application of controlling lights).) and describing the recommended capability (Paragraph 59 discloses the natural language response includes a description of the recommended capability (“would you like to grant me access?” or “but I can if you grant me access to the software application utilized to control the lights, would you like to grant me access?”.).
Claim 2, Weissenberger et al discloses
A smart home controller configured to (Fig. 1, label 114):
Send an execution instruction to a smart home device (paragraph 38 discloses “software applications executing locally at the client device 110 and/or remotely at the first-party server(s) and/or the third-party server(s) 192, and one or more fulfillment candidates can be granted responsive to the structured request(s)…”. Such indicates, following the example of “turn off the lights”, an instruction to lights can be sent for controlling lights when granting lights.);
Receive an execution response from the smart home device (paragraph 38 discloses “software applications executing locally at the client device 110 and/or remotely at the first-party server(s) and/or the third-party server(s) 192, and one or more fulfillment candidates can be granted responsive to the structured request(s)…”. Such discloses execution of instructions such as software applications executed locally, wherein the response from the smart home device is controlling the lights (following the example).); and
Provide an execution output to the user (Fig. 4a, where the examiner is “play music” and music is played.), the execution output based on the execution response (The execution response in this example is playing the music and the execution output is the output of the music from the assistant using necessary devices such as a speaker.).
Claim 3, Weissenberger et al discloses the smart home device includes at least one of an image capture device, an electronically activated speaker, an electronically activated microphone, an electronically activated light source, or an electronically activated power source. (paragraph 7 discloses speakers are used to play music, speakers being electronically activated.).
Claim 4, Weissenberger et al discloses the natural language input device and the output device include at least one of an audio transducer or a text input device (Fig. 5a,5b shows a text input device. Paragraph 7 discloses speakers or audio transducer.).
Claim 5, Weissenberger et al discloses an edge computing node, the edge computing node including the natural language processing device and the smart home command processing device (Fig. 1, label 110 includes 114 (ASR, NLU) and 113 (smart home command processing device or automated assistant client).).
Claim 6, Weissenberger et al discloses the natural language output response includes a description of the improved functionality provided by the recommended capability over the existing capability for addressing the requested electronic device command (paragraph 58-59 discloses a natural language output response recommending granting access to application controlling lights.).
Claim 7, Weissenberger et al discloses determining the output FSID based on the input FSID includes querying a system status table for the input FSID and identifying the output FSID that corresponds to the input FSID. (Paragraph 38 discloses output FSID such as fulfillment candidates with associating fulfillment metrics and input FSID with ASR and NLU with associated metrics such as ASR metrics and NLU metrics. A fulfillment database of candidates (system stats table) is queried to determine the output FSID (fulfillment candidates), where a selected fulfillment candidate indicates an identified output FSID corresponding to an ASR metric, NLU metric and fulfillment metric.)
Claim 8, Weissenberger et al discloses the system status table (Paragraph 38 discloses database of fulfillment candidates) includes a plurality of target FSIDS (paragraph 38 discloses ranking of fulfillment candidates associated with the voice command, wherein the ranked fulfillment candidates indicate fulfillment candidates closest to the voice command and ones less close. The ones ranked highest indicates the target FSIDS.) and a plurality of compatible FSIDs (paragraph 38 discloses ranking of fulfillment candidates associated with the voice command, wherein candidates lower in the ranking indicates compatible FSIDs.); and
At least one of the plurality of target FSIDs is associated with a compatible FSID among the plurality of compatible FSIDs (Paragraph 38 discloses ranking of fulfillment candidates, wherein the ranked candidates are associated with each other due to the ranking.).
Claim 9, Weissenberger et al discloses each of the plurality of target FSIDs is associated with an electronic device or a software skill usable by the smart home system (Paragraph 38 discloses fulfillment candidates which are actions or skills or rules or models performed to fulfill the user’s voice command. Paragraph 58-59 discloses voice command of “turn off the lights” has fulfillment candidate of granting access to software to control lights and turning off lights. Such are software skills usable by the smart home system.).
Claim 15 recites similar limitations as claim 1 and is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 16 recites similar limitations as claim 6 and is rejected on the same grounds as claim 6.
Claim 17 recites similar limitations as claim 7 and is rejected on the same grounds as claim 7.
Claim 18 recites similar limitations as claim 8 and is rejected on the same grounds as claim 8.
Claim 19 recites similar limitations as claim 9 and is rejected on the same grounds as claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weissenberger et al (US Publication No.: 20250149041) in view of Kirazci et al (US Publication No.: 20200294497).
Claim 11, Weissenberger et al discloses fulfillment database or system status table with FSIDs (Paragraphs 58-59 discloses fulfillment rules or model or FSIDs performed in order to accomplish a user’s request.), but fails to disclose receive a request to install a new smart home functionality, the new smart home functionality representing a new smart home hardware device or a new smart home software skill; and store a new FSID in the system status table associated with the new smart home functionality.
Kirazci et al discloses fulfillment module comprising
receive a request to install a new smart home functionality (Fig. 4 shows a user interacting with the assistant to install a new smart home functionality such as setting wiring of a thermostat or dimmer.), the new smart home functionality representing a new smart home hardware device or a new smart home software skill (Fig. 4 shows an example of a user engaging with an automated assistant to facilitate wiring of an electrical device such as a thermostat or a dimmer for a light switch. Such are examples of installation of new smart home hardware device or software skill such as dimming a light, measuring temperature in a home.); and
store a new FSID in the system status table associated with the new smart home functionality (paragraph 65 discloses a fulfillment module generates fulfillment information such as actions/rules (new FSID) according to user’s intent. Depending on the user’s intent, such as a request to install new smart home functionality, the fulfillment will generate information in order to accomplish such intent. Fig. 10, label storage subsystem stores data. Paragraph 65 discloses generating fulfillment information in order to fulfill a user’s request. Such generated fulfillment (new FSID) is data stored via a storage (system status table of fulfillment).).
It would be obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify Weissenberger et al’s fulfillment database by incorporating generation of fulfillments as disclosed by Kirazci et al so to improve a virtual assistant’s ability to perform actions to accomplish a user’s request hence improving the user’s experience with the virtual assistant.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10,12-14,20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-6044. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Andrew C Flanders can be reached at 571-272-7516. 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.
/LINDA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2655
Prosecution Insights