Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10, 12-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claims 1, 16 recite “automatically submitting the one or more parameter input values to one or more pages of the application while navigating to,” in claims 1, 16, 20 to “the given page,” and in claim 16 to “the terminus page,” the relationship of the recited “one or more pages,” to the presumed antecedent “a plurality of pages,” is unclear as to whether the one or more pages must be from “the plurality of pages,” must include the recited “a given page,” or lie outside these recitations. Examiner suggests “one or more of the plurality of pages.” Claim 1, 16 additionally recite “automatically determining one or more parameter input values based on the one or more input value indications;” and subsequently “automatically submitting the one or more parameter input values to one or more pages of the application,” which creates ambiguity as to the whether the values submitted must be the same values determined in the prior step. Examiner suggests “automatically submitting the one or more parameter input values.” Claim 20 similarly recites “automatically extracting one or more input value indications from the natural language query;” and subsequently “choosing a parameter input value from a plurality of candidate parameter input values based on an indication of an input value in the natural language query the one or more input value indications,” which creates ambiguity as to the whether the values chosen must be the same values extracted in the prior step. Examiner suggests “based on the extracted one or more input value indications.” Claim 20 additionally provides two recitations of “a large language model” iteration of the indefinite article in this way makes any necessary distinction between the first and second recitation unclear. Examiner suggests “the large language model,” for a singular instance or “a second large language model,” in the alternate. Claims 2-10, 12-15, 17-19 do not remedy and are similarly rejected. Claim 5 additionally recites “navigating to a given page out of the plurality of pages of the application on which the terminus user interface element appears…” parent claim 1 from which claim 5 depends has introduced “a given page,” and “a terminus user interface element.” Iteration of the indefinite article in this way makes it unclear whether claim 5 is intended to resolve the same “given page” recited in claim 1; claims 6-9 may benefit similarly. Examiner suggests “the given page.” Claim 6, 10, 12 recite “with the large language model or another large language model,” the added “another large language model,” creates an ambiguous relationship between the models as to whether they comprise separate iterations, individual instantiations, distinct models, etc. Examiner recommends “a second large language model,” and optionally adding distinct or different from the first if desired.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL C MCCORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3701. The examiner can normally be reached 730-630 M-F.
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, CAROLYN EDWARDS can be reached at (571) 270-7136. 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.
/PAUL C MCCORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights