DETAILED ACTION
This is responsive to the Response to Election/Restriction filed 03 February 2026.
Claims 1-6 and 8-20 are currently pending and considered below.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I in the reply filed on 03 February 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “the identified species are not patentably distinct and do not recite mutually exclusive characteristics as alleged” because claims “within Species I expressly recite the limitations alleged to distinguish Species II and Species III”. Applicant provides claim 10 as corresponding to Species II and claim 13 as corresponding to Species III. This is not found persuasive because claims 8 (independent claim of Species II) and claim 10 are patentably distinct and recite mutually exclusive characteristics. Also claim 15 (independent claim of Species III) and claim 13 are patentably distinct and recite mutually exclusive characteristics respectively.
In particular the limitations in claim 8 “obtain a question found on a first page of a question and answer website; construct, from the question and an upvoted answer to the question, a positive response that adheres to a relevance principle; navigate to a second page of the question and answer website by activating a related question link displayed on the first page of the question and answer website; construct, from a related question and an upvoted answer to the related question found on the second page of the question and answer website, a negative response that does not adhere to the relevance principle” are patentably distinct and recite mutually exclusive characteristics from “wherein the principle comprises relevance, wherein the positive answer is constructed by retrieving an upvoted answer to the question from a community question and answer forum, and wherein the negative answer is constructed by retrieving an answer to a related question” in claim 10. Specifically, claim 10 does not recite upvoting using different pages of a website to generate the positive and negative responses as claimed in claim 8.
Further, the limitations in claim 15 “obtain a question on a question and answer website that has a plurality of answers; construct a positive response to the question that adheres to a thoroughness principle by providing at least two of the plurality of answers to a machine learning model with instructions to integrate the at least two of the plurality of answers into a single thorough answer; construct a negative response to the question that does not adhere to the thoroughness principle” are patentably distinct and recite mutually exclusive characteristics from “wherein the principle comprises thoroughness, wherein the positive answer is constructed by prompting an individual machine learning model to combine different answers to the question, and wherein the negative answer is constructed by prompting an individual machine learning model to answer the question” in claim 13. Specifically, claim 13 does not recite a website with a plurality of answers and providing instructions to integrate answers as claimed in claim 15.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 8 and 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 03 February 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-6 and 9-14 are objected to because of the following informalities: parent claim 1, in each of lines 11 and 14, recites the limitation “the loss function” which should be amended to ‘the margin loss function’ for consistency. The dependent claims are objected to for depending upon an objected claim without providing a remedy.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 6 fails to further limit the limitations of parent claim 1 as training the preference model with the positive and the negative score by evaluating a margin loss function that subtracts the negative score from the positive score is already present in claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 and 9-14 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record, individually or in combination, does not disclose training the preference model with the positive score and the negative score by evaluating a margin loss function that subtracts the negative score from the positive score, wherein the margin loss function comprises a constant value that determines a magnitude of a loss value generated by the loss function; quantifying how much more the positive response adheres to the principle than the negative response; and setting the constant value of the loss function proportional to how much more the positive response adheres to the principle than the negative response as claimed in combination with the remaining limitations.
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 SAMUEL G NEWAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1058. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm 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, Daniel Washburn can be reached at 571-272-5551. 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.
/SAMUEL G NEWAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2657