Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is responsive to the Amendment filed 03/24/2026.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 19, and 20 are independent claims.
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
3. Claim(s) 1, 4-8, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Urdiales (U.S. Publication 2021/0357378 A1).
As per independent claim 1, Urdiales discloses a method for displaying a graphical user interface (GUI) for facilitating interactions with one or more entities, the method comprising:
receiving data associated with the one or more entities from one or more data sources (paragraph 0143, describing a machine learning system receiving a base event classification model and training data containing labeled and unlabeled data sets) (paragraph 0183 teaches collecting service outcome data)
providing the data associated with the one or more entities to one or more machine learning models (paragraph 0144, describing providing the training data to the machine learning system, the training data may include one or more documents (or the features thereof), labels of entities referenced in the one or more documents, labels of relationships between the entities referenced in the one or more documents, and the types of entities and relationships) (in paragraph 0183, service outcome data was used to train the system)
receiving explainabilty data from the one or more machine learning models, wherein the explainability data indicates one or more recommendations for interacting with the one or more entities (Figure 6, element 150, and paragraph 0085, describing additional optional components and elements as input to a suggestion generator to facilitate initiation of conversations with customers around topics that differentiate the enterprise, such as topics that are semantically relevant to key phrases found in the primary online content object) (paragraphs 00243-0246 teach recommending types of interactions by machine learning module based on context) (also see paragraph 0195, 0196) ; and
displaying the GUI for facilitating interactions with the one or more entities, wherein the GUI comprises one or more communication affordances generated using the explainability data, wherein a user selection of a communication affordance generates a communication data structure configured to facilitate a recommended interaction of the one or more recommended interactions via a communication medium (Fig. 22, paragraph [0256]-[0258], the right panel of GUI 2200 displays contact information which includes buttons (Email, Call) to generate communication with contacts/entities via email/call) (paragraph 0210, GUI in Fig. 41-42, “Select an action” tab, “Send ticket notification”, “Send internal email”) can be considered as communication affordances to facilitate interactions via email (also see paragraph 0247, paragraph 0278).
As per dependent claim 4, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Urdiales also discloses receiving a user selection of a communication affordance of the one or more communication affordances (Fig. 22, paragraph [0256]-[0258], right panel of GUI 2200 displays contact information which includes buttons (Email, Call) to generate communication with contacts/entities via email/call) (paragraph 0210, GUI in Fig. 41-42, “Select an action” tab, “Send ticket notification”, “Send internal email”) can be considered as communication affordances to facilitate interactions via email (also see paragraph 0247, paragraph 0278).
As per dependent claim 5, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 4 as described above. Urdiales also discloses wherein the communication medium associated with the selected communication affordance is email (Fig. 22, paragraph [0256]-[0258], right panel of GUI 2200 displays contact information which includes buttons (Email, Call) to generate communication with contacts/entities via email/call) (paragraph 0210, GUI in Fig. 41-42, “Select an action” tab, “Send ticket notification”, “Send internal email”) can be considered as communication affordances to facilitate interactions via email (also see paragraph 0247, paragraph 0278).
As per dependent claim 6, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 5 as described above. Urdiales also discloses in response to the user selection of the communication affordance, generating a communication data structure comprising an email to be sent to a representative of the entity associated with the selected communication affordance (Fig. 22, paragraph [0256]-[0258], right panel of GUI 2200 displays contact information which includes buttons (Email, Call) to generate communication with contacts/entities via email/call) (paragraph 0210, GUI in Fig. 41-42, “Select an action” tab, “Send ticket notification”, “Send internal email”) can be considered as communication affordances to facilitate interactions via email to a representative (email created from email template/format) (also see paragraph 0247, paragraph 0278).
As per dependent claim 7, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 5 as described above. Urdiales also discloses sending the email to the representative of the entity associated with the selected communication affordance (Fig. 22, paragraph [0256]-[0258], right panel of GUI 2200 displays contact information which includes buttons (Email, Call) to generate communication with contacts/entities via email/call) (paragraph 0210, GUI in Fig. 41-42, “Select an action” tab, “Send ticket notification”, “Send internal email”) can be considered as communication affordances to facilitate interactions via email (also see paragraph 0247, paragraph 0278).
As per dependent claim 8, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 4 as described above. Urdiales also discloses wherein the communication medium associated with the selected communication affordance is a video or voice call application or a phone network (paragraph 0249) (Fig. 22, paragraph 0256-0258, GUI 220 displays buttons (Email, Call) to generate communication with contacts/entities).
As per dependent claim 15, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Urdiales also discloses receiving user feedback associated with a communication affordance of the one or more communication affordances, wherein the user feedback indicates an outcome of interacting with an entity of the one or more entities according to the recommended interaction associated with the communication affordance (paragraphs 0223-0224 and Figure 30).
As per dependent claim 16, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 15 as described above. Urdiales also discloses providing the user feedback to a reinforcement learning model; and receiving updated explainability data indicating an improved recommendation for interacting with the entity (paragraph 0226-0227 and Figure 30).
As per dependent claim 17, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Urdiales also discloses wherein the one or more data sources comprises a server storing historical interaction data associated with at least one of the one or more entities (paragraph 0108).
As per dependent claim 18, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Urdiales also discloses wherein the one or more data sources comprises one or more news reports about at least one of the one or more entities (paragraph 0120).
As per independent claim 19, Urdiales discloses a system for displaying a graphical user interface (GUI) for facilitating interactions with one or more entities, the system comprising one or more processors configured to… (paragraph 0007 and Figure 6). Independent claim 19 additionally incorporates substantially similar subject matter as that of independent claim 1 above, and is additionally rejected along the same rationale used the rejection of claim 1.
As per independent claim 20, Urdiales discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising instructions for displaying a graphical user interface (GUID) for facilitating interactions with one or more entities that, when executed by one or more processors of a computer system, cause the computer system to… (paragraph 0187 and Figure 14). Independent claim 20 additionally incorporates substantially similar subject matter as that of independent claim 1 above, and is additionally rejected along the same rationale used the rejection of claim 1.
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.
4. Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urdiales (U.S. Publication 2021/0357378 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stoliar (WO2024/220281 A1).
As per dependent claim 2, Urdiales teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Urdiales does not teach expressly wherein providing the data associated with the one or more entities to the one or more machine learning models comprises: categorizing the data associated with the one or more entities according to one or more predefined interaction scenarios using a first machine learning model; and generating one or more prompts for a large language model based on categorization of the data associated with the one or more entities, however, Stoliar teaches this limitation (See Stoliar, Abstract, and paragraphs 0084 and 0094, describing using a large language model to generate prompts to provide input to a machine learning model). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the generation of prompts using a large language model of Stoliar with the machine learning system of Urdiales. The motivation for doing so would have been to understand an intent of the user and extract relevant information from the user input, as taught by Stoliar (See Stoliar, paragraph 0094). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Stoliar with Urdiales for the benefit of understanding an intent of the user and extracting relevant information from the user input to obtain the invention as specified in claim 2.
As per dependent claim 3, Urdiales and Stoliar teach the limitations of claim 2 as described above. Urdiales and Stoliar also teach wherein the one or more prompts are configured to cause the large language model to output the explainability data (See Urdiales, Figure 21 and paragraph 0257).
5. Claim(s) 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urdiales (U.S. Publication 2021/0357378 A1), as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Copeland (US 20210406964 A1).
As per dependent claim 9, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 8 as described above. Urdiales also discloses in response to the user selection of the communication affordance, generating a call with a representative of the entity associated with the selected communication affordance (Fig. 22, paragraph [0256]-[0258], right panel of GUI 2200 displays contact information which includes Call button to generate communication with contacts/entities. Urdiales also discloses developing script for calls (paragraph 0176) but does not teach in response to the user selection of the communication affordance, generating a communication data structure comprising a script for a call with a representative of the entity associated with the selected communication affordance. Copeland teaches this limitation ((Fig. 3) (paragraph 0045 describing a dynamic script generator 71 creates an on-call real time dynamic script which may be displayed on tele-agent dashboard 15 for a tele-agent to use during sales calls). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the generation of real-time dynamic script of Copeland with the communication medium of Urdiales. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide the user/specialist with important up-to-date information of the system/industry to enhance knowledge and confidence during the call which improves customer service/experience (Copeland, paragraph 0046).
As per dependent claim 10, Urdiales and Copeland disclose the limitations of claim 9 as described above. Urdiales also discloses contacting the representative of the entity associated with the selected communication affordance using the video or voice call application or the phone network (paragraph 0249) (Fig. 22, paragraph [0256]-[0258], right panel of GUI 2200 displays contact information which includes Call button to generate communication with contacts/entities. Copland teaches calling customer (paragraph 0045).
As per dependent claim 11, Urdiales and Copeland disclose the limitations of claim 10 as described above. Urdiales in view of Copeland teaches displaying the script for the call on the GUI while the call is in progress (Copeland (Fig. 3) (paragraph 0045 describing a dynamic script generator 71 creates an on-call real time dynamic script which may be displayed on tele-agent dashboard 15 for a tele-agent to use during sales calls)).
As per dependent claim 12, Urdiales discloses the limitations of claim 10 as described above. Urdiales in view of Copeland discloses providing the script to a text-to-speech application; generating audio data comprising the script using the text-to-speech application; and transmitting the audio data to the representative of the entity while the call is in progress (Urdiales, paragraph 0221).
6. Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urdiales (U.S. Publication 2021/0357378 A1), as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Anaokar (U.S. Publication 2023/0052123 A1).
As per dependent claim 13, Urdiales teaches the limitations of claim 8 as described above. Urdiales does not teach expressly in response to the user selection of the communication affordance, generating a communication data structure comprising an invitation for a call with a representative of the entity associated with the selected communication affordance, however, Anaokar teaches this limitation (See Anaokar, paragraph 0078, describing a recommendation unit representing electronic communications related actionable suggestions, which may include a regular message or calendar invitation). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the generation of a communication data structure comprising an invitation of Anaokar with the communication medium of Urdiales. The motivation for doing so would have been to ensure the user did not miss a response or follow-up to a communication, as taught by Anaokar (See Anaokar, paragraph 0078). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Anaokar with Urdiales for the benefit of ensuring the user did not miss a response or follow-up to a communication to obtain the invention as specified in claim 13.
As per dependent claim 14, Urdiales and Anaokar teach the limitations of claim 13 as described above. Urdiales and Anaokar also teach populating an electronic calendar associated with the representative of the entity with the invitation (See Urdiales, paragraphs 0362-0363).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 03/24/2026 have been fully considered but are now moot under the new ground (new mapping) of the rejections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to Kieu Vu whose telephone number is (571) 272-4057. The examiner can
normally be reached on Monday - Thursday (6:30am - 4:30pm). 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, Kieu Vu can be reached on (571) 272-4057. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private
PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you
would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the
automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KIEU D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights