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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 20, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendments
This office action responds to the amendments filed on March 20, 2026 for application 18/534,972. Claims 1, 8-9, and 15-16 are amended, claim 21 is added as a new claim, and claims 1-6, 8-13, 15-16, and 18-21 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner has fully considered the Applicant’s arguments filed on March 20, 2026, and the Examiner responds as provided below.
Regarding the Applicant’s response at page 11 of the Remarks that concerns the objection to the claims, the amendments to the claims addresses the issue and the objection is withdrawn.
Regarding the Applicant’s response at pages 11-15 of the Remarks that concerns the § 102 and § 103 rejection, the Applicant’s arguments in conjunction with the claim amendments are persuasive, and consequently the Examiner conducted a new prior art search. The Applicant’s arguments are now moot with respect to the pending claims because the arguments do not apply to one of the references currently used in the rejection of the aforementioned claims as detailed below.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 10, and 18 objected to because of the following informalities: “information to be processed” should be preceded by “the” due to the amendments of claims 1, 9, and 16. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The following conventions apply to the mapping of the prior art to the claims:
Italicized text – claim language.
Parenthetical plain text – Examiner’s citation and explanation.
Citation without an explanation – an explanation has been previously provided for the respective limitation(s).
Quotation marks – language quoted from a prior art reference.
Underlining – language quoted from a claim.
Brackets – material altered from either a prior art reference or a claim, which includes the Examiner’s explanation that relates a claim limitation to the quoted material of a reference.
Braces – a limitation taught by another reference, but the limitation is presented with the mapping of the instant reference for context.
Numbered superscript – a first phrase to be moved upwards to the primary reference analysis.
Lettered superscript – a second phrase to be moved after the movement of the first phrase from which it was lifted, or more succinctly, move numbered material first, lettered material last.
A. Claims 1-3, 8-11, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 2018/0293484, “Wang”) in view of Ben-Dor et al. (US 2019/0279615, “Ben-Dor”).
Regarding Independent Claim 1
Wang discloses
A processing method, applied to a processing device (Fig. 3, ¶ [0130], “FIG. 3 depicts a first scenario [processing method] 300 of a computing [processing] device 301 presenting a response to a query from a user 325 while indicating a responding virtual assistant from one of a plurality of virtual assistants 310-320, according to embodiments of the disclosure.”), comprising:
step S1, responding to at least one first response result not meeting a first preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category to be ‘weather’ and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category [a first preset condition] (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set [as a response to the first response result not meeting a first preset condition].”);
step S2, obtaining at least one second response result (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents [after obtaining], via the output device 120, a [second] response [result] to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant 135 providing the response.”); and
step S3, preprocessing the at least one first response result and the at least one second response result (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine [through preprocessing] the query's category to be ‘weather’ and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”);
wherein the step S3 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
step S31, processing the at least one first response result and the at least one second response result according to a preset processing strategy (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category [via processing] to be ‘weather’ [via a preset processing strategy that utilizes categories] and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”); and/or
step S32, outputting the at least one first response result and the at least one second response result according to a preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067], “By doing so, the virtual assistant manager 130 improves response time in the multiple virtual assistant environment by only polling those virtual assistants [that provide the first and second response results] 135 that are likely to provide [output] an acceptable response.”; and “In certain embodiments, the first set may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) virtual assistants [as a preset output strategy] 135 in the identified category.”),
wherein: the first response result is processed and/or output by at least one first target application or target service; and/or the second response result is processed and/or output by at least one second target application or target service (¶ [0066], “Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [second target application] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [first target application] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”).
wherein the step S3 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
outputting the response result to be output according to the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067]);
the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067]) comprises:
selecting at least one response result to be output according to an information selection strategy (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “In certain embodiments, the first set [and associated response result] may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) [as a information selection strategy] virtual assistants 135 in the identified category.”; and “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents [a response result to be output], via the output device 120, a response to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant 135 providing the response.”),
comprising:
1 …;
2 …; and
obtaining a network score of the response result through a network (Fig. 1, ¶¶ [0085]-[0086], “In another embodiment, the virtual assistant server 155 may include computing resources usable by a virtual assistant 135 for responding to a query.”; and “In certain embodiments, the virtual assistant server 155 and/or the virtual assistant application 160 provide a network-based (e.g., cloud-based) virtual assistant to the electronic device 101, such as via a client virtual assistant 135 running on the electronic device 101.”; and ¶ [0076], “In certain embodiments, the virtual assistant manager [within the network] 130 obtains a response quality score (“RQS”) for each response [result] received from the polled [network] virtual assistants 135 (e.g., from the first set).”; and “The RQS is an objective measurement by which responses from different virtual assistants 135 may be compared.”).
Wang doesn’t disclose
1 obtaining a privacy level of the response result based on keywords in the response result;
2 obtaining a matching level of the response result according to a matching degree of the response result and information to be processed; and
Ben-Dor, however, discloses
1 obtaining a privacy level of the response result based on keywords in the response result (¶¶ [0028]-[0029], “Similarly, in some examples, a determination that a command associated with a high level privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content [keywords] for responding to the command, and determining [to obtain] that the content has a privacy level associated with it (or that the content has a privacy level associated with it other than low). In other examples, a determination that a command is associated with a high level privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content for responding [as the response result] to the command, and determining from one or more words [keywords], phrases, numbers and/or symbols in the content, that the content contains information with privacy concerns.”);
2 obtaining a matching level of the response result according to a matching degree of the response result and information to be processed (¶ [0029], “In other examples, a determination [to obtain a matching level] that a command [information to be processed] is associated [matched] with a high level [matching degree] privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content for responding to the command, and determining from one or more words, phrases, numbers and/or symbols in the content, that the content contains [based on obtaining a matching level] information [with the response result] with privacy concerns.”);
Regarding the combination of Wang and Ben-Dor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interaction system of Wang to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR establishes that a rationale for obviousness is proven by showing a “use of [a] known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.” See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
To substantiate the conclusion of obviousness under this KSR rationale, the Examiner finds pursuant to MPEP § 2143(I)(C):
1) the prior art contained a base system, namely the interaction system of Wang, upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” through the use of a privacy-level feature;
2) the prior art contained a “comparable” system, namely the command system of Ben-Dor, that has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention through the privacy-level feature; and
3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known improvement technique of applying the privacy-level feature to the base interaction system of Wang, and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 2
Wang in view of Ben-Dor (“Wang-Ben-Dor”) discloses the processing method according to claim 1, and Wang further discloses
wherein the step S1 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
step S11, in response to information to be processed, outputting a first processing request, so that the first target application or target service obtains the first response result based on the first processing request (¶¶ [0063]-[0066], “For example, a particular user input may be a command [as information to be processed] (e.g., a query for information) directed [as an output comprising a first processing request] to a virtual assistant [first target application or service] 135 when the command addresses a specific virtual assistant 135, when the command addresses the electronic device 101, when a particular keyword is spoken, when a particular button is pressed, when particular gesture or movement is made, and the like.”);
step S12, in response to the first response result not meeting the first preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]), and/or a first operation meeting a second preset condition, and/or, the processing device meeting a third preset condition (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”),
outputting a second processing request, so that the second target application or target service obtains the second response result (¶¶ [0064]-[0067], i.e., when a virtual assistant cannot meet a preset condition, a more specific virtual assistant as a second target application or service receives a second processing request to obtain the second response result that will encompass a higher rank).
Regarding Claim 3
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 1, and Wang further discloses
wherein the step S31 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
processing the first response result according to a first preset processing strategy; and/or processing the second response result according to a second preset processing strategy (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category to be ‘weather’ [via a preset processing strategy in accordance with categories] and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that process a second response result to provide information about the weather] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”).
Regarding Claim 8
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 7, and Wang further discloses
wherein the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067]) further comprises:
selecting at least one output device according to a device selection strategy (¶¶ [0057]-[0059], “In some embodiments, all or portions of the output device 120 may be integrated with the input device 115. For example, the input device 115 and output device 120 may form a touchscreen or similar touch-sensitive display.”, i.e., the selection of the output device that is integrated with the input device comprises a “device selection strategy” that emphasizes convenience);
selecting at least one response result to be output and/or an output sequence of at least one output device according to a sequence selection strategy (¶¶ [0142]-[0145], “In certain embodiments, the user 325 may desire another response. For example, the user 325 may be familiar with the suggested restaurant but may be looking for another option in the area. In response to the user 325 asking for another response, the virtual assistant manager 305 selects 455 a second response to the query. Response selection 455 may be as described above, e.g., based on a response quality score, preferred virtual assistants, and the like. Here, the virtual assistant manager 305 selects 455 the response ‘VIC'S RISTORANTE ITALIANO’ from a virtual assistant named ‘CUISINE,’ which may be one of the first virtual assistant 310 and the second virtual assistant 315.”, i.e., a “sequence selection strategy” is employed to ensure the “second response result” address the user’s second inquiry);
output form and/or output time and/or output scene (¶¶ [0132]-[0134], “Note that the query 330 requires knowledge of the user's calendar [output time] in order to answer the spoken question. In one embodiment, the virtual assistant manager 305 accesses the user's calendar in order to determine when the appointment is.”);wherein the selecting at least one response result to be output (¶¶ [0066]-[0068]) and/or the output sequence of at least one output device according to the sequence selection strategy comprises:
selecting the at least one response result to be output and/or the output sequence of the at least one output device according to an attribute of the at least one response result to be output (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “In certain embodiments, the first set may be limited to only top [as an attribute] (e.g., highest ranked) virtual assistants 135 in the identified category.”) and/or a content of the at least one response result to be output and/or a scene in which the processing device is located (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”).
Regarding Independent Claim 9
Wang discloses
A processing method, applied to a processing device (Fig. 3, ¶ [0130], “FIG. 3 depicts a first scenario [processing method] 300 of a computing [processing] device 301 presenting a response to a query from a user 325 while indicating a responding virtual assistant from one of a plurality of virtual assistants 310-320, according to embodiments of the disclosure.”), comprising:
step S10, obtaining at least one first response result and/or at least one second response result (¶¶ [0064]-[0068], “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents [after obtaining], via the output device 120, a [first or second] response [result] to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant 135 providing the response.”); and
step S20, detecting whether the first response result and/or the second response result meets a preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category to be ‘weather’ and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated [detected to be] with the ‘weather’ category [preset condition]. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category [preset condition] (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”),
in response to the first response result and/or the second response result not meeting the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]),
processing the first response result and/or the second response result according to a preset processing strategy (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine [through preprocessing] the query's category to be ‘weather’ [via a preset processing strategy that utilizes categories] and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”); and/or
in response to the first response result and/or the second response result meeting the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]),
outputting the first response result and/or the second response result according to a preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067], “By doing so, the virtual assistant manager 130 improves response time in the multiple virtual assistant environment by only polling those virtual assistants [that provide the first and second response results] 135 that are likely to provide [output] an acceptable response.”; and “In certain embodiments, the first set may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) virtual assistants [as a preset output strategy] 135 in the identified category.”);
wherein:
the first response result is processed and/or output by at least one first target application or target service; the second response result is processed and/or output by at least one second target application or target service (¶ [0066], “Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [second target application] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [first target application] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”);
wherein the step S20 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]), the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067]) comprises:
selecting at least one response result to be output according to an information selection strategy (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “In certain embodiments, the first set [and associated response result] may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) [as a information selection strategy] virtual assistants 135 in the identified category.”; and “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents [a response result to be output], via the output device 120, a response to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant 135 providing the response.”),
comprising:
1 …;
2 …; and
obtaining a network score of the response result through a network (Fig. 1, ¶¶ [0085]-[0086], “In another embodiment, the virtual assistant server 155 may include computing resources usable by a virtual assistant 135 for responding to a query.”; and “In certain embodiments, the virtual assistant server 155 and/or the virtual assistant application 160 provide a network-based (e.g., cloud-based) virtual assistant to the electronic device 101, such as via a client virtual assistant 135 running on the electronic device 101.”; and ¶ [0076], “In certain embodiments, the virtual assistant manager [within the network] 130 obtains a response quality score (“RQS”) for each response [result] received from the polled [network] virtual assistants 135 (e.g., from the first set).”; and “The RQS is an objective measurement by which responses from different virtual assistants 135 may be compared.”).
Wang doesn’t disclose
1 obtaining a privacy level of the response result based on keywords in the response result;
2 obtaining a matching level of the response result according to a matching degree of the response result and information to be processed; and
Ben-Dor, however, discloses
1 obtaining a privacy level of the response result based on keywords in the response result (¶¶ [0028]-[0029], “Similarly, in some examples, a determination that a command associated with a high level privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content [keywords] for responding to the command, and determining [to obtain] that the content has a privacy level associated with it (or that the content has a privacy level associated with it other than low). In other examples, a determination that a command is associated with a high level privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content for responding [as the response result] to the command, and determining from one or more words [keywords], phrases, numbers and/or symbols in the content, that the content contains information with privacy concerns.”);
2 obtaining a matching level of the response result according to a matching degree of the response result and information to be processed (¶ [0029], “In other examples, a determination [to obtain a matching level] that a command [information to be processed] is associated [matched] with a high level [matching degree] privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content for responding to the command, and determining from one or more words, phrases, numbers and/or symbols in the content, that the content contains [based on obtaining a matching level] information [with the response result] with privacy concerns.”);
Regarding the combination of Wang and Ben-Dor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interaction system of Wang to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR establishes that a rationale for obviousness is proven by showing a “use of [a] known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.” See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
To substantiate the conclusion of obviousness under this KSR rationale, the Examiner finds pursuant to MPEP § 2143(I)(C):
1) the prior art contained a base system, namely the interaction system of Wang, upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” through the use of a privacy-level feature;
2) the prior art contained a “comparable” system, namely the command system of Ben-Dor, that has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention through the privacy-level feature; and
3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known improvement technique of applying the privacy-level feature to the base interaction system of Wang, and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 10
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 9, and Wang further discloses
wherein the step S10 (¶¶ [0064]-[0068]) comprises:
step S101, in response to information to be processed, outputting a first processing request to the first target application or target service and the second target application or target service (¶¶ [0063]-[0066], “For example, a particular user input may be a command [as information to be processed] (e.g., a query for information) directed [as an output comprising a first processing request] to a virtual assistant [first target application or service] 135 when the command addresses a specific virtual assistant 135, when the command addresses the electronic device 101, when a particular keyword is spoken, when a particular button is pressed, when particular gesture or movement is made, and the like.”; and “For example, in response to the spoken query ’What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category to be ‘weather’ and it may then poll only the virtual assistants [first and second target applications or services that receive the information to be processed] 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”); and
step S102, receiving a first response result output by the first target application or target service, and/or receiving a second response result output by the second target application or target service (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents, via the output device [that receives] 120, a [first or second] response [result] to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant [first or second target application or service] 135 providing the response [result].”).
Regarding Claim 11
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 9, and Wang further discloses
wherein processing the first response result and/or the second response result according to the preset processing strategy (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
outputting prompt information (¶ [0068], “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents, via the output device 120, a response to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant [as prompt information] 135 providing the response. By identifying the responding virtual assistant 135 via the presented indicator, the user becomes aware of which virtual assistant 135 provides which responses.”), and
in response to a first operation, processing the first response result and/or the second response result according to the preset processing strategy (¶¶ [0070]-[0071], “In one embodiment, the user designates a particular virtual assistant [as a first operation] 135 as the preferred virtual assistant 135 for a category.”; and “Further, where a category has a preferred virtual assistant 135, the virtual assistant manager 130 responds [after processing and then providing the first response result and in accordance with a preset processing strategy] to the query by providing the response generated by the preferred virtual assistant 135 for the category to which the query belongs.”); and/or
outputting the processing request to the associated device so that the associated device performs preset processing; and/or
receiving or generating or determining at least one third response result (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”).
Regarding Claim 15
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 9, and Wang further discloses
wherein the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067]) further comprises:
selecting at least one output device according to a device selection strategy (¶¶ [0057]-[0059], “In some embodiments, all or portions of the output device 120 may be integrated with the input device 115. For example, the input device 115 and output device 120 may form a touchscreen or similar touch-sensitive display.”, i.e., the selection of the output device that is integrated with the input device comprises a “device selection strategy” that emphasizes convenience);
selecting at least one response result to be output and/or an output sequence of at least one output device according to a sequence selection strategy (¶¶ [0142]-[0145], “In certain embodiments, the user 325 may desire another response. For example, the user 325 may be familiar with the suggested restaurant but may be looking for another option in the area. In response to the user 325 asking for another response, the virtual assistant manager 305 selects 455 a second response to the query. Response selection 455 may be as described above, e.g., based on a response quality score, preferred virtual assistants, and the like. Here, the virtual assistant manager 305 selects 455 the response ‘VIC'S RISTORANTE ITALIANO’ from a virtual assistant named ‘CUISINE,’ which may be one of the first virtual assistant 310 and the second virtual assistant 315.”, i.e., a “sequence selection strategy” is employed to ensure the “second response result” address the user’s second inquiry);
output form and/or output time and/or output scene (¶¶ [0132]-[0134], “Note that the query 330 requires knowledge of the user's calendar [output time] in order to answer the spoken question. In one embodiment, the virtual assistant manager 305 accesses the user's calendar in order to determine when the appointment is.”);
wherein the selecting at least one response result to be output (¶¶ [0066]-[0068]) and/or the output sequence of at least one output device according to the sequence selection strategy comprises:
selecting the at least one response result to be output (¶¶ [0066]-[0068]) and/or the output sequence of the at least one output device according to an attribute of the at least one response result to be output (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “In certain embodiments, the first set [associated with response results to be output] may be limited to only top [as an attribute] (e.g., highest ranked) virtual assistants 135 in the identified category.”) and/or a content of the at least one response result to be output and/or a scene in which the processing device is located.
B. Claims 4-6, 12-13, and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Ben-Dor, and further in view of Nadkar et al. (US 2018/0204569, “Nadkar”).
Regarding Claim 4
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 1, and Wang further discloses
wherein the step S3 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
detecting whether the second response result…1
Wang-Ben-Dor doesn’t disclose
1 …meets a fourth preset condition, and/or whether the processing device meets a fifth preset condition, in response to the second response result not meeting the fourth preset condition and the processing device not meeting the fifth preset condition, proceeding to step S31, and/or in response to the second response result meeting the fourth preset condition or the processing device meeting the fifth preset condition, proceeding to step S32.
Nadkar, however, discloses
1 …meets a fourth preset condition, and/or whether the processing device meets a fifth preset condition, in response to the second response result not meeting the fourth preset condition and the processing device not meeting the fifth preset condition, proceeding to step S31, and/or in response to the second response result meeting the fourth preset condition or the processing device meeting the fifth preset condition, proceeding to step S32 (¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued [based upon each command satisfying a corresponding preset condition, with fourth and fifth preset conditions being obvious with the first and second preset conditions taught by Wang]. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services, the link component 308 may provide [a plurality of] responses to the respective commands [that satisfy a corresponding preset condition to produce the appropriate response result]. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”, i.e., the different commands are in different “sets,” as disclosed by Wang, and each voice command/query is associated with a corresponding response result).
Regarding the combination of Wang-Ben-Dor and Nadkar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR establishes that a rationale for obviousness is proven by showing a “use of [a] known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.” See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
To substantiate the conclusion of obviousness under this KSR rationale, the Examiner finds pursuant to MPEP § 2143(I)(C):
1) the prior art contained a base system, namely the interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor, upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” through the use of an associated device feature;
2) the prior art contained a “comparable” system, namely the interaction system of Nadkar, that has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention through the associated device feature; and
3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known improvement technique of applying the associated device feature to the base interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor, and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 5
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 1, and Wang further discloses
wherein the step S31 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
step S31a, outputting the first response result and/or the second response result to…1 ()
Wang-Ben-Dor doesn’t disclose
1 …at least one associated device, and/or receiving a third response result output by the associated device; or step S31b, determining or generating at least one third response result, and/or outputting the third response result to at least one associated device.
Nadkar, however, discloses
1 …at least one associated device, and/or receiving a third response result output by the associated device; or step S31b, determining or generating at least one third response result, and/or outputting the third response result to at least one associated device (¶ [0022], “The voice assistant manager 104 may manage voice assistant services native to the vehicle infotainment system [as a associated device] 102 or voice assistant service located on separate [other associated] devices that are in communication with the voice infotainment system 102. For example, the voice assistant manager 104 may provide a gateway to a plurality of voice assistant services to allow a user to seamlessly use any available voice assistant [that outputs the first or second response result via the associated device and associated voice assistant for the respective response result] by simply speaking the wake word of the desired service.”; and ¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services [and associated devices], the link component 308 may provide responses [a first, second, or third response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”, i.e., the different commands are in different “sets,” as disclosed by Wang, and each voice command/query is associated with a corresponding response result).
Regarding the combination of Wang-Ben-Dor and Nadkar, the rationale to combine is the same as provided for claim 4 due to the overlapping subject matter of claims 4 and 5.
Regarding Claim 6
Wang-Ben-Dor in view of Ben-Dor, and further in view of Nadkar (“Wang-Ben-Dor-Nadkar”) discloses the processing method according to claim 5, and Nadkar further discloses
wherein in the step S31b, the determining or generating at least one third response result comprises (¶ [0044]-[0046]):
in response to obtaining a second operation, processing the first response result and/or the second response result (¶ [0030], “The application integration platform 204 may forward the voice commands [as a second operation] to the voice assistant application 210 and receive a result [associated with processing the first response result], if any, of the command.”; and ¶ [0035], “The voice assistant manager 104 may interpret voice commands, perform one or more selections within a corresponding application [as an operation] (such as opening a menu, selecting an item from the menu, and clicking a button or item) to cause the non-voice application to perform the requested function.”); and/or
obtaining a processing result of a third target application or target service based on the first response result and/or the second response result (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”).
Regarding the combination of Wang and Nadkar, the rationale to combine is the same as provided for claim 4 due to the overlapping subject matter of claims 4 and 6.
Regarding Claim 12
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 11, and Wang-Ben-Dor doesn’t disclose
1 wherein the receiving or generating or determining the at least one third response result comprises: outputting the first response result and/or the second response result to at least one associated device, and/or receiving a third response result output by the associated device; or determining or generating at least one third response result, and/or outputting the third response result to at least one associated device.
Nadkar, however, discloses
1 wherein the receiving or generating or determining the at least one third response result (¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services, the link component 308 may provide [generate] responses [a third response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”, i.e., the different commands are in different “sets,” as disclosed by Wang, and each voice command/query is associated with a corresponding response result) comprises:
outputting the first response result and/or the second response result to at least one associated device, and/or
receiving a third response result output by the associated device; or
determining or generating at least one third response result, and/or outputting the third response result to at least one associated device (¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services [and associated devices], the link component 308 may provide responses [a third response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”, i.e., the different commands are in different “sets,” as disclosed by Wang, and each voice command/query is associated with a corresponding response result; and ¶ [0022], “The voice assistant manager 104 may manage voice assistant services native to the vehicle infotainment system [as a associated device] 102 or voice assistant service located on separate [other associated] devices that are in communication with the voice infotainment system 102. For example, the voice assistant manager 104 may provide a gateway to a plurality of voice assistant services to allow a user to seamlessly use any available voice assistant by simply speaking the wake word of the desired service.”).
Regarding the combination of Wang-Ben-Dor and Nadkar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR establishes that a rationale for obviousness is proven by showing a “use of [a] known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.” See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
To substantiate the conclusion of obviousness under this KSR rationale, the Examiner finds pursuant to MPEP § 2143(I)(C):
1) the prior art contained a base system, namely the interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor, upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” through the use of an associated device feature;
2) the prior art contained a “comparable” system, namely the interaction system of Nadkar, that has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention through the associated device feature; and
3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known improvement technique of applying the associated device feature to the base interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor, and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 13
Wang-Ben-Dor-Nadkar discloses the processing method according to claim 12, and Nadkar further discloses
wherein the determining or generating the at least one third response result (¶¶ [0044]-[0046]) comprises:
in response to obtaining a second operation (¶¶ [0072]-[0074], “In some embodiments, the user may indicate a desire for another response to a spoken query. Here, the user may desire a second opinion or feel that a first provided response is not a correct or appropriate response to the query. For example, in response to the query ‘What is the best restaurant near me?’ a first virtual assistant 135 may respon[d] with the name of a fast food restaurant, where the user does not consider fast food to be an appropriate response to the query. In certain embodiments, the user indicates the desire for another response by repeating the query [as a second operation]. In one embodiment, the user may ask a follow up query, such as ‘What else?’ or explicitly request a second opinion.”),
processing the first response result and/or the second response result (¶¶ [0064]-[0068], “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents [after processing], via the output device 120, a [second] response [result] to the query [associated with the second operation] along with an indicator of a virtual assistant 135 providing the response [second response result].”); and/or
obtaining a processing result of a third target application or target service based on the first response result and/or the second response result (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”).
Regarding Claim 21
Wang-Ben-Dor discloses the processing method according to claim 9, and Wang further discloses
wherein: the step S20 (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]) comprises:
detecting whether the first response result meets the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], i.e., detecting first response result is associated with weather as the preset condition);
in response to the first response result meeting the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]), outputting the first response result according to the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067], “By doing so, the virtual assistant manager 130 improves response time in the multiple virtual assistant environment by only polling those virtual assistants [that provide the first and second response results] 135 that are likely to provide [output] an acceptable response.”; and “In certain embodiments, the first set may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) virtual assistants [as a preset output strategy] 135 in the identified category.”); and/or
in response to the first response result not meeting the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]), detecting whether the second response result meets the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], i.e., detecting whether the second response result falls with the category of “weather” as a preset condition),
in response to the second response result meeting the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]), outputting the second response result according to the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067], i.e., output according to rank as preset output strategy); and/or,
in response to the second response result not meeting the preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]), processing the second response result according to the preset processing strategy (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], i.e., selecting another virtual assistant that is within the “weather” category); or
the step S20 comprises:
detecting whether the first response result meets a first preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066],) i.e., detecting whether the first response result meets the weather category as a first preset condition;
in response to the first response result meeting the first preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]),
detecting whether the second response result meets a second preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “Upon determining that a query (e.g., a spoken query) does not address a particular virtual assistant 135, the virtual assistant manager 130 polls a first set [based upon a second preset condition associated with a vehicle as taught by Nadkar as addressed below] of the virtual assistants 135 with the query. The first set of virtual assistant 135 includes at least one virtual assistant 135.”);
in response to the second response result meeting the second preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]),
outputting the first response result and the second response result according to the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067], “By doing so, the virtual assistant manager 130 improves response time in the multiple virtual assistant environment by only polling those virtual assistants [that provide the first and second response results] 135 that are likely to provide [output] an acceptable response.”; and “In certain embodiments, the first set may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) virtual assistants [as a preset output strategy] 135 in the identified category.”); and/or,
in response to the second response result not meeting the second preset condition,
Wang-Ben-Dor doesn’t disclose
1 outputting a second processing request to at least one associated device, so that the associated device outputs a third response result, in response to the third response result meeting the second preset condition, outputting the first response result and the third response result according to the preset output strategy.
Nadkar further discloses
1 outputting a second processing request to at least one associated device (¶ [0022], “The voice assistant manager 104 may manage voice assistant services native to the vehicle infotainment system [as an associated device] 102 or voice assistant service located on separate [other associated] devices that are in communication with the voice infotainment system 102. For example, the voice assistant manager 104 may provide a gateway to a plurality of voice assistant services to allow a user to seamlessly use any available voice assistant by simply speaking the wake word of the desired service.”),
so that the associated device outputs a third response result (¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services [and associated devices], the link component 308 may provide responses [a third response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”, i.e., the different commands are in different “sets,” as disclosed by Wang, and each voice command/query is associated with a corresponding response result),
in response to the third response result meeting the second preset condition (¶¶ [0044]-[0046]), outputting the first response result and the third response result according to the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued [and acted upon with a corresponding output according to the preset output strategy]. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services [and associated devices], the link component 308 may provide responses [a third response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut [as a third response result], and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees [as a first response result].’”),
Regarding the combination of Wang and Nadkar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interaction system of Wang to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR establishes that a rationale for obviousness is proven by showing a “use of [a] known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.” See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
To substantiate the conclusion of obviousness under this KSR rationale, the Examiner finds pursuant to MPEP § 2143(I)(C):
1) the prior art contained a base system, namely the interaction system of Wang, upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” through the use of an associated device feature;
2) the prior art contained a “comparable” system, namely the interaction system of Nadkar, that has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention through the associated device feature; and
3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known improvement technique of applying the associated device feature to the base interaction system of Wang, and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Independent Claim 16
Wang discloses
A processing method, applied to a processing device (Fig. 3, ¶ [0130], “FIG. 3 depicts a first scenario [processing method] 300 of a computing [processing] device 301 presenting a response to a query from a user 325 while indicating a responding virtual assistant from one of a plurality of virtual assistants 310-320, according to embodiments of the disclosure.”), comprising:
step S1000, in response to at least one first response result of a first target application or target service, and/or at least one second response result of a second target application or target service (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category to be ‘weather’ and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category [a first preset condition] (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set [as a response to the first response result not meeting a first preset condition].”); and
1 …;
wherein the step S1000 comprises:
in response to the at least one first response result not meeting a first preset condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category to be ‘weather’ and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category [a first preset condition] (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set [as a response to the first response result not meeting a first preset condition].”),
detecting whether the at least one second response result meets a second preset condition (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents [after obtaining], via the output device 120, a [second] response [result] to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant 135 providing the response.”);
in response to the at least one second response result not meeting the second preset condition, outputting first prompt information, and/or proceeding to the step S2000; and/or
in response to the at least one second response result meeting the second preset condition, processing the second response result according to a preset processing strategy (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine the query's category to be ‘weather’ [via a preset processing strategy in accordance with categories] and it may then poll only the virtual assistants 135 associated with the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that process a second response result to provide information about the weather] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set.”) and outputting the second response result, or outputting the second response result according to an output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067], i.e., output according to rank as output strategy);
the preset output strategy (¶¶ [0066]-[0067]) comprises:
selecting at least one response result to be output according to an information selection strategy (¶¶ [0067]-[0068], “In certain embodiments, the first set [and associated response result] may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) [as a information selection strategy] virtual assistants 135 in the identified category.”; and “The virtual assistant manager 130 also presents [a response result to be output], via the output device 120, a response to the query along with an indicator of a virtual assistant 135 providing the response.”),
comprising:
2 …;
3 …; and
obtaining a network score of the response result through a network (Fig. 1, ¶¶ [0085]-[0086], “In another embodiment, the virtual assistant server 155 may include computing resources usable by a virtual assistant 135 for responding to a query.”; and “In certain embodiments, the virtual assistant server 155 and/or the virtual assistant application 160 provide a network-based (e.g., cloud-based) virtual assistant to the electronic device 101, such as via a client virtual assistant 135 running on the electronic device 101.”; and ¶ [0076], “In certain embodiments, the virtual assistant manager [within the network] 130 obtains a response quality score (“RQS”) for each response [result] received from the polled [network] virtual assistants 135 (e.g., from the first set).”; and “The RQS is an objective measurement by which responses from different virtual assistants 135 may be compared.”).
Wang doesn’t disclose
1 step S2000, outputting a third response result, the third response result being obtained through processing the first response result and/or the second response result by an associated device.
2 obtaining a privacy level of the response result based on keywords in the response result;
3 obtaining a matching level of the response result according to a matching degree of the response result and information to be processed; and
Ben-Dor, however, discloses
2 obtaining a privacy level of the response result based on keywords in the response result (¶¶ [0028]-[0029], “Similarly, in some examples, a determination that a command associated with a high level privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content [keywords] for responding to the command, and determining [to obtain] that the content has a privacy level associated with it (or that the content has a privacy level associated with it other than low). In other examples, a determination that a command is associated with a high level privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content for responding [as the response result] to the command, and determining from one or more words [keywords], phrases, numbers and/or symbols in the content, that the content contains information with privacy concerns.”);
3 obtaining a matching level of the response result according to a matching degree of the response result and information to be processed (¶ [0029], “In other examples, a determination [to obtain a matching level] that a command [information to be processed] is associated [matched] with a high level [matching degree] privacy intent may comprise analyzing identified content for responding to the command, and determining from one or more words, phrases, numbers and/or symbols in the content, that the content contains [based on obtaining a matching level] information [with the response result] with privacy concerns.”);
Regarding the combination of Wang and Ben-Dor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interaction system of Wang to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR establishes that a rationale for obviousness is proven by showing a “use of [a] known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.” See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
To substantiate the conclusion of obviousness under this KSR rationale, the Examiner finds pursuant to MPEP § 2143(I)(C):
1) the prior art contained a base system, namely the interaction system of Wang, upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” through the use of a privacy-level feature;
2) the prior art contained a “comparable” system, namely the command system of Ben-Dor, that has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention through the privacy-level feature; and
3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known improvement technique of applying the privacy-level feature to the base interaction system of Wang, and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Nadkar, however, discloses
1 step S2000, outputting a third response result, the third response result being obtained through processing the first response result and/or the second response result by an associated device (¶ [0022], “The voice assistant manager 104 may manage voice assistant services native to the vehicle infotainment system [as an associated device that processes the first and/or second response results] 102 or voice assistant service located on separate [other associated] devices that are in communication with the voice infotainment system 102 [and can output first, second and third response results]. For example, the voice assistant manager 104 may provide a gateway to a plurality of voice assistant services [to output first, second and third response results] to allow a user to seamlessly use any available voice assistant [through the use of any associated devices] by simply speaking the wake word of the desired service.”; and ¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services [and associated devices], the link component 308 may provide responses [including a third response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”).
Regarding the combination of Wang-Ben-Dor and Nadkar, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR establishes that a rationale for obviousness is proven by showing a “use of [a] known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.” See MPEP § 2143(I)(C).
To substantiate the conclusion of obviousness under this KSR rationale, the Examiner finds pursuant to MPEP § 2143(I)(C):
1) the prior art contained a base system, namely the interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor, upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement” through the use of an associated device feature;
2) the prior art contained a “comparable” system, namely the interaction system of Nadkar, that has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention through the associated device feature; and
3) one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known improvement technique of applying the associated device feature to the base interaction system of Wang-Ben-Dor, and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 18
Wang-Ben-Dor-Nadkar discloses the processing method according to claim 16, and Nadkar further discloses
wherein before the step S2000 (¶¶ [0022], [0044]-[0046]), the method further comprises:
determining at least one associated device according to the first response result (¶ [0022], “The voice assistant manager 104 may manage [determine] voice assistant services native to the vehicle infotainment system [as a associated device] 102 or voice assistant service located on separate [other associated] devices that are in communication with the voice infotainment system 102. For example, the voice assistant manager 104 may provide a gateway to a plurality of voice assistant services to allow a user to seamlessly use any available voice assistant [that outputs the first response result via the associated device and associated voice assistant for the respective response result] by simply speaking the wake word of the desired service.”; and ¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services [and associated devices], the link component 308 may provide responses [a first response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”) and/or the second response result and/or information to be processed and/or operation information and/or a scene in which the processing device is located (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”).
Regarding the combination of Wang-Ben-Dor and Nadkar, the rationale to combine is the same as provided for claim 16 due to the overlapping subject matter of claims 16 and 18.
Regarding Claim 19
Wang-Ben-Dor-Nadkar discloses the processing method according to claim 16, and Nadkar further discloses
wherein in the step S2000 (¶¶ [0022], [0044]-[0046]), the third response result being obtained through processing the first response result and/or the second response result by the associated device comprises (¶¶ [0022], [0044]-[0046]) at least one of the following:
in response to the editing operation, the associated device obtains the third response result after processing the first response result and/or the second response result;
in response to the processing request (¶¶ [0063]-[0066]), the associated device wakes up or runs a third target application or target service (¶ [0022], “For example, the voice assistant manager 104 may provide a gateway to a plurality of voice assistant services to allow a user to seamlessly use any available voice assistant by simply speaking the wake word [to wake up] of the desired service [of the associated device]. ”), and processes the first response result and/or the second response result to obtain the third response result (¶¶ [0044]-[0046], “When the user indicates that there are no more commands, the link component 308 may release the session between the voice assistant and the audio or visual resources so that additional commands for different voice assistants can be issued. As another example, after providing a plurality of parsed out commands to different voice assistant services [and associated devices], the link component 308 may provide responses [a third response result] to the respective commands. By way of illustration a user may say ‘Siri, play music. Alexa, open garage door. Google, tell me about the weather’ and the audio system may respond, based on data provided back by respective services ‘playing music [music starts], the garage door has been shut, and the weather is sunny with a high of 75 degrees.’”, i.e., the different commands are in different “sets,” as disclosed by Wang, and each voice command/query is associated with a corresponding response result; and ¶ [0022], “The voice assistant manager 104 may manage voice assistant services native to the vehicle infotainment system [as a associated device] 102 or voice assistant service located on separate [other associated] devices that are in communication with the voice infotainment system 102. For example, the voice assistant manager 104 may provide a gateway to a plurality of voice assistant services to allow a user to seamlessly use any available voice assistant [that outputs the first or second response result via the associated device and associated voice assistant for the respective response result] by simply speaking the wake word of the desired service.”); and
in response to the preset operation, the associated device outputs the first response result and/or the second response result to an intermediate device, and/or receives the third response result output by the intermediate device (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”).
Regarding the combination of Wang and Nadkar, the rationale to combine is the same as provided for claim 16 due to the overlapping subject matter of claims 16 and 19.
Regarding Claim 20
Wang-Ben-Dor-Nadkar discloses the processing method according to claim 16, and Wang further discloses
wherein the {step S2000 (Nadkar ¶¶ [0022], [0044]-[0046])} comprises:
detecting whether the third response result meets a preset output condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066], “For example, in response to the spoken query ‘What is the weather like today?’ the virtual assistant manager 130 may determine [or detect based on a preset output condition that] the query's category to be ‘weather’ and it may then poll only the virtual assistants [including that which outputs a third response result] 135 associated with [and meets] the ‘weather’ category. Here, weather-specific virtual assistants [that provide a second response result] 135 and general-purpose (e.g., non-specialist) virtual assistants [that provide a first response result] 135 may be included in the first set, but category specific (e.g., special-purpose) virtual assistants 135 not associated with the weather category [a first preset condition] (such as a dining-specific, sports-specific, or finance-specific virtual assistant 135) would be excluded from the first set [as a response to the first response result not meeting a first preset condition].”);
in response to that the third response result meets the preset output condition (¶¶ [0064]-[0066]), outputting the third response result (¶¶ [0066]-[0067], “By doing so, the virtual assistant manager 130 improves response time in the multiple virtual assistant environment by only polling those virtual assistants [that provide the third response result] 135 that are likely to provide [output] an acceptable response.”; and “In certain embodiments, the first set may be limited to only top (e.g., highest ranked) virtual assistants [as a preset output condition] 135 in the identified category.”); and/or
in response to that the third response result does not meet the preset output condition, preprocessing the third response result (noting only one limitation need be met with the claim limitation of “or”).
Regarding the combination of Wang-Ben-Dor and Nadkar, the rationale to combine is the same as provided for claim 16 due to the overlapping subject matter of claims 16 and 20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D'ARCY WINSTON STRAUB whose telephone number is (303)297-4405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00 Mountain Time.
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, WILLIAM KORZUCH can be reached at (571)272-7589. 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.
/D'Arcy Winston Straub/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2491
Prosecution Insights