DETAILED ACTION
1. This communication is in response to the RCE filed on 12/15/2025. Claims 2-21 are pending and have been examined. Claim 1 is cancelled.
Response to Amendments and Arguments
2. With regard to the non-statutory double patenting rejection, the amendments are not sufficient to overcome the rejection in view of the new references cited in this Office action, therefore, the rejection is maintained.
With regard to the independent claims, the applicant is requested to clarify if user input = input data = request data. Note that the independent claims also recite “first data” “word” and “directive data” which can be simplified.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. In particular, the applicant specifically argues that for the independent Claims 2, 8 and 16, the cited references do not teach “receive, based at least in part on user input to a natural language interface, request data defining an action to be performed by a first device associated with a user account, the action being based on satisfaction of a condition, wherein the condition is independent of the user input” and therefore “even after voice input is received, the system also requires a separate/additional condition to be true. Thus, this is a two-step process compared to a single step process in Sarin.”
In response, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Note that UR teaches: [Trigger-action Programming, para 4] “Whereas our simple interface (Figure 2) only allows for one trigger and one action channel per recipe, our complex interface (Figure 3) allows users to add multiple trigger and action channels. All triggers are composed by the conjunction “and.” For instance, one could trigger an action via “if it is 6:00pm and raining.” Therefore, the teachings of UR provide a ready mechanism to trigger any device to perform any (multiple different) actions when satisfying multiple different conditions, where some conditions are independent of the user input.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. Claims 2-15, 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarin, et al. (US 20130124207; hereinafter SARIN) in view of Harrang, et al. (US 20100031299; hereinafter HARRANG), and further in view of Blase Ur, et al. (CHI 2014, hereinafter UR).
As per claim 2, SARIN (Title: Voice-controlled camera operations) discloses “A system comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to (SARIN, [0020], memory, computer; [0041], a graphical user interface (GUI) for a voice-controlled image-capture application):
receive, based at least in part on user input to a natural language interface, request data defining an action to be performed by [ a first device associated with a user account ], the action being based on satisfaction of a condition, [ wherein the condition is independent of the user input ]; store, in a data store, first data specifying at least one word that, when identified from input data, results in performance of the action by the first device based on a satisfaction of the condition; receive, from [ a second device associated with the user account ], the input data; determine, based at least in part on analysis of the input data, that the at least one word is included in the input data; determine that the condition is satisfied and send, based at least in part on determining that the at least one word is included in the input data and based on determining that the condition is satisfied, directive data to the first device to cause the performance of the action (SARIN, [Abstract], a user's voice (e.g., a word or phrase) is converted to audio input data by the computing device, which then compares (e.g., using an audio matching algorithm) the audio input data <read on ‘request data’ and ‘satisfaction of a condition’> to an expected voice command <read on ‘first data’ such as to control a device’s action> associated with an image capture application .. activates an image capture application and captures one or more digital images based on a received voice command <read on executing a directive to perform an action>).”
SARIN does not explicitly disclose “a first device associated with a user account .. a second device associated with the user account ..” However, the feature is taught by HARRANG (Title: Systems and methods for device dependent media content delivery in a local area network).
In the same field of endeavor, HARRANG teaches: [0041] “the user may register each of their media playback devices (e.g., any of the television device, the multi-function media playback device, the home stereo unit, the personal desktop computer, the wireless laptop computer, the digital assistant (PDA) device, or the automobile having seatback video player devices ..) through a media content delivery interface, such that both the MCP server and the relay device will recognize every possible target destination device” where “register” reads on associating each device with the user’s account, to be controlled for action based on the rule (or voice command) as request data, e.g., play music on my mobile phone. HARRANG also teaches: [0042] “If it is determined that the most efficient transfer means is direct, at block 508, a transfer of the requested media content to the designated target receiving device(s) is scheduled with the MCP server 200 as the source of the media content transfer.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of HARRANG in the system taught by SARIN, to specifically provide a ready mechanism for a user to register any personal devices (i.e., under the user’s account) for controlling/connecting with any destination devices, as well as any source devices for media content selection and playback.
SARIN in view of HARRANG does not explicitly disclose “wherein the condition is independent of the user input ..” However, the feature is taught by UR (Title: Practical Trigger-Action Programming in the Smart Home).
In the same field of endeavor, UR teaches: Fig. 2 and Fig. 3, and [Trigger-action Programming, para 4] “Whereas our simple interface (Figure 2) only allows for one trigger and one action channel per recipe, our complex interface (Figure 3) allows users to add multiple trigger and action channels. All triggers are composed by the conjunction “and.” For instance, one could trigger an action via “if it is 6:00pm and raining.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of UR in the system taught by SARIN and HARRANG, to provide a ready mechanism to trigger any device to perform any action when satisfying multiple different conditions, where some conditions are independent of the user input.
As per claim 3 (dependent on claim 2), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “wherein the first data specifies multiple different actions including the action, and wherein sending the directive data causes performance of the multiple different actions (SARIN, [Abstract], compares (e.g., using an audio matching algorithm) the audio input data to an expected voice command <read on first data> .. activates an image capture application; UR, [Introduction, para 4], • H1: Many desired behaviors for a smart home are expressible using trigger-action programming. • H2: Some behaviors require multiple triggers or actions <read on sequence of actions>).”
As per claim 4 (dependent on claim 3), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “wherein the first data specifies a sequence in which the multiple different actions are to be performed, and wherein sending the directive data causes the performance of the multiple different actions in the sequence (see Claim 3>).”
As per claim 5 (dependent on claim 2), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “wherein the directive data includes an identifier of the first device (SARIN, [0045], Voice commands can be used for invoking or controlling functionality; [0038], Command events can cause the image capture engine to invoke image capture operations; HARRANG, [0046], the device identification section 904 may have an electronic serial number field <read on identifier> where a user register their device).”
As per claim 6 (dependent on claim 2), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “wherein the performance of the action causes a state of the first device to change (SARIN, [0038], Command events can cause the image capture engine to invoke image capture operations <read on a state change, which is subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation>).”
As per claim 7 (dependent on claim 2), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “wherein the performance of the action comprises outputting audio via a speaker of the first device (SARIN, [0036], FIG. 3, the device OS 350 includes components for .. generating voice output for a speaker; [0039], The rendering engine 318 can also provide output commands to the device OS 350 for output over a speaker or headphones. The exact operations performed as part of the rendering depend on implementation).”
Claim 8 (similar in scope to claim 2) is rejected under the same rationales as applied above for claim 2.
As per claim 9 (dependent on claim 8), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “causing performance of the operation and at least one additional different related operation (SARIN, [Abstract], activates an image capture application and captures one or more digital images <read on additional different related operations, where related is subject to BRI> based on a received voice command).”
As per claim 10 (dependent on claim 9), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “causing performance of the operation and the at least one additional different related operation in a sequence (SARIN, [Abstract], activates an image capture application and captures one or more digital images <read on additional different related sequential operations where different-related is subject to BRI> based on a received voice command. Also see Claim 3).”
Claim 11 (similar in scope to claim 2 or 8) is rejected under the same rationales as applied above for claim 2 or 8. Also see claim 10.
Claim 12 (similar in scope to claim 5 and claim 2) is rejected under the same rationales as applied above for claim 5 and claim 2. Also see claims 10-11.
As per claim 13 (dependent on claim 8), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR further discloses “determining the second device is collocated in an environment with the first device (HARRANG, [0043], FIG. 6 illustrates a flow diagram of locally initiated media content distribution process <where locally reads on collocated which can be broadly interpreted>).”
Claim 14 (similar in scope to claim 6) is rejected under the same rationales as applied above for claim 6.
Claim 15 (similar in scope to claim 7) is rejected under the same rationales as applied above for claim 7, but replace outputting audio via a speaker with outputting content via a display (SARIN, [0036], FIG. 3, the device OS 350 includes components for rendering (e.g., rendering visual output to a display ..); [0039], The rendering engine 318 can provide output commands for the rendered view to the device OS 350 for output on a display .. The exact operations performed as part of the rendering depend on implementation).”
Claims 20, 21 (similar in scope to claims 9, 10) is rejected under the same rationales as applied above for claims 9, 10.
4. Claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR, and further in view of Christensen, et al. (US 20140109152; hereinafter CHRISTENSEN).
Claim 16 (similar in scope to claim 2) is rejected under the same rationales as applied above for claim 2, with references SARIN, HARRANG and UR. Furthermore, the additional limitation “first data specifying an event that satisfies the condition; determining that the event has occurred; and sending, based at least in part on the determining that the event has occurred ..” is rejected with reference CHRISTENSEN.
SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR does not explicitly disclose “first data specifying an event that satisfies the condition; determining that the event has occurred; and sending, based at least in part on the determining that the event has occurred ..” However, the feature is taught by CHRISTENSEN (Title: Systems and methods for scheduling interactive media and events).
In the same field of endeavor, CHRISTENSEN teaches: [0021] “devices that stores a record of the timing for an alert about a future event, monitors the passage of time to determine if the timing for the alert has occurred and when the timing for the alert has occurred, notifies the user using visual, aural and/or other sensory means and interacts with any other devices associated with the scheduled event such as digital video recorders, security systems, lights, media players or the like” and [0032] “At the appropriate time, the electronic calendar system may notify the user of the scheduled broadcast and/or event.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of CHRISTENSEN in the system taught by SARIN, HARRANG and UR, to provide time-based event detection for controlling the operation of other devices.
As per claim 17 (dependent on claim 16), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR and further in view of CHRISTENSEN further discloses “determining that the event has occurred using a machine-learning model (CHRISTENSEN, [0021], devices that .. monitors the passage of time to determine if the timing for the alert has occurred; [0055], in the case of machine to machine, a software module <read on machine learning model which is subject to BRI> interacting with the electronic calendar associated with the user's interactive broadcast media device … the appointment can be automatically scheduled without user involvement ..).”
As per claim 18 (dependent on claim 16), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR and further in view of CHRISTENSEN further discloses “receiving event data from the first device; and determining that the event has occurred based at least in part on an analysis of the event data (CHRISTENSEN, [0032], At the appropriate time, the electronic calendar system may notify the user of the scheduled broadcast and/or event <read on analysis of the event data>; [0055], a software module interacting with the electronic calendar associated with the user's interactive broadcast media device … the appointment can be automatically scheduled without user involvement ..).”
As per claim 19 (dependent on claim 16), SARIN in view of HARRANG and UR and further in view of CHRISTENSEN further discloses “determining a current time corresponding to a time specified by the first data; and determining the event has occurred based at least in part on determining that the current time corresponds to the time (CHRISTENSEN, [0021], devices that stores a record of the timing for an alert about a future event, monitors the passage of time to determine if the timing for the alert has occurred and when the timing for the alert has occurred, notifies the user using visual, aural and/or other sensory means and interacts with any other devices associated with the scheduled event such as digital video recorders, security systems, lights, media players or the like).”
Double Patenting
5. Claims of the present application are rejected (except claim 17) on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over respective claims of U.S. patent 11822857 (original application 16/924835) in view of the references cited in this Office action.
Present application – 2/8/11/16. A system comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive, based at least in part on user input to a natural language interface, request data defining an action to be performed by a first device associated with a user account, the action being based on satisfaction of a condition; store, in a data store, first data specifying at least one word that, when identified from input data, results in performance of the action by the first device based on a satisfaction of satisfies the condition; receive, from a second device associated with the user account, the input data; determine, based at least in part on analysis of the input data, that the at least one word is included in the input data; determine that the condition is satisfied; and send, based at least in part on determining that the at least one word is included in the input data and based on determining that the condition is satisfied, directive data to the first device to cause the performance of the action. [for claim 16, event replaces word identified]
Patent 11822857 – 21 or 35. A system comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive, based at least in part on user input to a graphical user interface, request data indicating a user request to define a rule that specifies an action to be performed by a first device associated with a user account, store, in a data store, first data specifying a word that, when identified from audio data that represents user speech, causes performance of the action; receive, from a second device associated with the user account, the audio data; determine, based at least in part on analysis of the audio data, that the word is associated with the audio data; and send, based at least in part on determining that the word is associated with the audio data, directive data to the first device to cause the performance of the action. [for claim 35, event replaces word identified]
Present application – 3. The system of claim 2, wherein the first data specifies multiple different actions including the action, and wherein sending the directive data causes performance of the multiple different actions.
Patent 11822857 – 22. The system of claim 21, wherein the first data specifies multiple actions including the action, and wherein sending the directive data causes performance of the multiple actions.
Present application - 4. The system of claim 3, wherein the first data specifies a sequence in which the multiple different actions are to be performed, and wherein sending the directive data causes the performance of the multiple different actions in the sequence.
Patent 11822857 – 23. The system of claim 22, wherein the first data specifies a sequence in which the multiple actions are to be performed, and wherein sending the directive data causes the performance of the multiple actions in the sequence.
Present application – 5/12. The system of claim 2, wherein the directive data includes an identifier of the first device.
Patent 11822857 – 24. The system of claim 21, wherein the directive data includes an identifier of the first device.
Present application – 6/14. The system of claim 2, wherein the performance of the action causes a state of the first device to change.
Patent 11822857 – 25. The system of claim 24, wherein the performance of the action causes a state of the first device to change.
Present application – 7/15. The system of claim 2, wherein the performance of the action comprises outputting audio via a speaker of the first device. [For claim 15, see 103 section]
Patent 11822857 – 26. The system of claim 21, wherein the performance of the action comprises outputting audio via a speaker of the first device.
Present application – 9/20. The method of claim 8, further comprising causing performance of the operation and at least one additional related operation. [see claim 9, section 103]
Patent 11822857 – 28.. The method of claim 27, wherein the first data specifies multiple operations including the operation, and wherein the causing of the performance of the operation comprises causing performance of the multiple operations.
Present application – 10/21. The method of claim 9, further comprising causing performance of the operation and the at least one additional related operation in a sequence. [see claim 10, section 103]
Patent 11822857 – 29. The method of claim 28, wherein the first data specifies a sequence in which the multiple operations are to be performed, and wherein the causing of the performance of the multiple operations comprises causing the performance of the multiple operations in the sequence.
Present application - 13. The method of claim 8, further comprising determining the second device is collocated in an environment with the first device.
Patent 11822857 – 32. The method of claim 31, wherein the second device is collocated in an environment with the first device.
Present application - 18. The method of claim 16, further comprising receiving event data from the first device; and determining that the event has occurred based at least in part on an analysis of the event data.
Patent 11822857 – 36. The method of claim 35, further comprising receiving event data from the first device, wherein the determining that the event has occurred is based at least in part on an analysis of the event data.
Present application - 19. The method of claim 16, further comprising: determining a current time corresponding to a time specified by the first data; and determining the event has occurred based at least in part on determining that the current time corresponds to the time.
Patent 11822857 – 37. The method of claim 35, wherein the first data specifies a time, the method further comprising determining that a current time corresponds to the time, and wherein the determining that the event has occurred is based at least in part on the determining that the current time corresponds to the time.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FENG-TZER TZENG whose telephone number is 571-272-4609. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9:00-5:00). The fax phone number where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-4609.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Paras Shah (SPE) can be reached on 571-270-1650.
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.
/FENG-TZER TZENG/ 1/9/2026
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2653