DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Action is in response to communications filed on 03/27/2026.
Claims 1, 7-8, and 15 have been amended. There are no new/ cancelled claims.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination. Claims 1, 8 and 15 are independent claims.
Claims 1-20 remain pending in this application.
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 .
Response to Arguments Regarding Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The Applicant's amendment/ arguments, see page 8 of REMARKS, filed 03/27/2026, with respect to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In the response filed on 03/27/2026, applicant puts forth in substance that:
“The Examiner rejects Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. §101 (STEP 2) and stated that the claims were directed towards a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Applicant has made a modest amendment to the identified Independent Claims in an effort to address the Examiner's concern. Any amendment in this regard should not be construed as an agreement with or acquiescence to the propriety of the Examiner's contention. Applicant reserves the right to comment on the appropriateness of the §101-based amendment at a future time, should Applicant deem it appropriate to do so.” (page 8 of REMARKS, filed 03/27/2026).
The Applicant’s remarks do not provide any specific reasons as to why either the findings of fact or the legal conclusion that the claims are patent ineligible under 35 USC § 101 is allegedly in error. Applicant’s remarks are only generalizations not tied to the facts of the cases that amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how.
Response to Arguments Regarding Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 USC § 103, and more specifically to the new limitation “based on the determined classification, placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue” (see pages 8-10 of REMARKS, filed 03/27/2026), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Reddy (US 20190068784 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 (STEP 2) because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 1 is directed to a method. Although the claimed invention is a statutory category of invention, the method comprises:
determining an initial communication is sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP), wherein the initial communication describes an event (Mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion);
intercepting the initial communication to the PSAP before the initial communication reaches a human operator at the PSAP (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions));
analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (Mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion);
using a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP, wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions));
receiving at least one response to the one or more questions (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions));
sending the initial communication, the one or more questions, and the at least one response to the human operator at the PSAP (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)); and
based on the determined classification, placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)).
The limitations of “determining an initial communication is sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP), wherein the initial communication describes an event”, and “analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification” as drafted, are process steps that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. Nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, “determining” and “analyzing” in the context of this claim encompass the user manually detecting/ identifying a communication directed to a PSAP, and manually identifying the type/ nature of the communication.
Similarly, the limitations of “intercepting the initial communication to the PSAP before the communication reaches a human operator at the PSAP; using a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP, wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication; receiving at least one response to the one or more questions; sending the initial communication, the one or more questions, and the at least one response to the human operator at the PSAP; and based on the determined classification, placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing relationships or interactions between people, but for the recitation of generic computer components (a computer model). This concept falls within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping. Accordingly, the claim recites abstract idea(s).
Next, an evaluation is done whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional limitations in: “a communication analysis engine”, and “a computer model”. As explained by the Supreme Court, in order to make a claim directed to a judicial exception patent-eligible, the additional element or combination of elements must do "‘more than simply state the judicial exception while adding the words ‘apply it’". Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208, 221, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1982-83 (2014) (quoting Mayo Collaborative Servs. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 72, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965). Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 223, 110 USPQ2d at 1983. See also 573 U.S. at 224, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Next, the additional elements are evaluated individually and in combination to determine whether they amount to significantly more. The claim recites the additional elements in “a communication analysis engine”, and “a computer model”. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “a communication analysis engine”, and “a computer model” are generic computer elements, applied generically to an abstract idea. The mere recitation of “a communication analysis engine”, and “a computer model” is akin to adding the words “apply it" with a computer in conjunction with the abstract idea. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or add significantly more in Step 2B (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Taking the elements both individually and as a combination, the computer components at each step of the process perform purely generic computer functions. Therefore, the claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself, making the claim patent ineligible.
As for claim 8, the claims are directed towards the corresponding system to perform the steps similar to those disclosed in method claim 1. Although the system comprising memory and processor(s) is a statutory categories of invention, the claim limitations do not teach or further define over the limitations put forth in claim 1, hence, directed to a judicial exception. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1.
Claim 15 is directed to a method. Although the claimed invention is a statutory category of invention, the method comprises:
intercepting the initial communication to the PSAP before the initial communication reaches a human operator at the PSAP (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions));
analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (Mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion);
using a chat bot to engage in a chat or dialogue with user associated with the communication to obtain additional details related to the initial communication, wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions));
sending the chat or dialogue and the obtained additional details related to the communication to the PSAP (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)); and
placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non- emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue (Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity-managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)).
The limitations of “analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. Nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, “in response to…” and “analyzing” in the context of this claim encompass the user manually detecting/ identifying type/ nature of the communication directed to a PSAP.
The limitations of “using a chat bot to engage in a chat or dialogue with user associated with the initial communication to obtain additional details related to the initial communication; sending the chat or dialogue and the obtained additional details related to the initial communication to the PSAP; and placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non- emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing relationships or interactions between people. This concept falls within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping. Accordingly, the claim recites abstract idea(s).
Next, an evaluation is done whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional limitations in: “receiving an initial communication sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP);” and “a chat bot”. While the step “receiving an initial communication sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP);” is used in obtaining an initial communication that was sent to a PSAP, these obtaining/ receiving step is performed in order to gather data for the step of mental analysis and organizing human activity, and is a necessary precursor for all uses of the recited exception. It is thus extra-solution activity, and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. In addition, as explained by the Supreme Court, in order to make a claim directed to a judicial exception patent-eligible, the additional element or combination of elements must do "more than simply state the judicial exception while adding the words ‘apply it’". Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208, 221, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1982-83 (2014) (quoting Mayo Collaborative Servs. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 72, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965). Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 223, 110 USPQ2d at 1983. See also 573 U.S. at 224, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Next, the additional elements are evaluated individually and in combination to determine whether they amount to significantly more. The claim recites the additional elements in “a chat bot”. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because “a chat bot” is generic computer elements, applied generically to an abstract idea. The mere recitation of “a chat bot” is akin to adding the words “apply it" with a computer in conjunction with the abstract idea. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. In addition, and as set forth above, the step of “receiving an initial communication sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP);” is performed in order to gather data for the step of mental analysis and organizing human activity, and are necessary precursors for all uses of the recited exception. These steps are thus extra-solution activities. Implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or add significantly more in Step 2B (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). Taking the elements both individually and as a combination, the computer components at each step of the process perform purely generic computer functions. Therefore, the claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself, making the claim patent ineligible.
Dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20 depend on claims 1, 8 and 15 respectively, and introduces additional limitations:
wherein the initial script is executed by a chat bot;
wherein the initial communication to the PSAP is a text communication;
wherein the initial communication to the PSAP and the at least one response are audio communications and the audio communications are converted to text before being sent to the human operator at the PSAP;
wherein the initial communication is intercepted by a communication analysis engine that is physically separate from the PSAP;
wherein the script is not fully executed if the initial communication is not related to PSAP services;
using the computer model to execute a fire script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a fire emergency PSAP communication; using the computer model to execute a medical emergency script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a medical emergency PSAP communication; and using the computer model to execute a crime script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a crime related emergency PSAP communication; and
wherein a script is used as a guide for the chat bot to engage in the chat or dialogue.
As set forth in claim 1, 8 and 15, these limitations as drafted, are processes that each, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers method of managing relationships or interactions between people, such as managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
The claim does not include additional elements that integrate the judicial exception (abstract idea) into a practical application of the exception. If the exception is not integrated into a practical application, then the claim is “directed to” the exception.
In addition, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, because the additional elements are either generic computer elements, applied generically to an abstract idea, or insignificant extra-solution activities that do not amount to an inventive concept. Taking the elements both individually and as a combination, each step of the process perform purely generic functions. Therefore, dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 1, 8 and 15.
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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ray et al. (herein as, Ray, US 20100003961 A1) in view of Martin et al. (hereinafter, Martin, US 20200274962 A1) in view of Reddy (US 20190068784 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ray discloses a method, comprising:
determining an initial communication is sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP) (see [0023]; user 302 using a wireless communications device 304 to communicate emergency data messages to public safety answering points; also see [0024]; The user 302 may send an emergency data message package 306 by making an emergency data message request on the wireless communications device 304), wherein the initial communication describes an event (see [0024]-[0025]; The emergency data message package (EDMP) 306 may include the emergency data message 308a that may include up to 160 characters, in the case of an SMS message, abbreviated dialing code 308b, and mobile directory number (MDN) 308c; The abbreviated dialing code 308b may be an alphanumeric code that is stored in the wireless communications device 304 and communicated with the emergency data message 308a to a mobile switching center (MSC) 310; For example, the abbreviated dialing codes may include "000000SOS1," "000000SOS2," "000000SOS3," and so on to indicate different types of emergencies and certain content in the emergency data messages. The different types of emergencies may include medical condition, automobile accident, fire, assault, or any other type of emergency data message that may be helpful to an operator at a PSAP for dispatching emergency personnel);
intercepting, by a communication analysis engine, the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0030]; software on the device intercepts the email and reroutes it to the carrier's DMSC(O) for processing) before the initial communication reaches a human operator at the PSAP (see [0031]; determining PSAPs local to the user 302 and communications capabilities of PSAPs that are determined to be local to the user 302; determine the nearest emergency service provider as per the emergency type; also see [0032]-[0035]; before selecting the PSAP to route the emergency data message 308a);
analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (see [0025]-[0026]; The DMSC(O) 316 utilizes a process executed by a processing unit 312a that determines whether the emergency data message 308a is, in fact, an emergency data message being communicated to a PSAP or a standard data message, such as a text message being communicated between peers. In addition, the MSC 310, DMSC(O) 316, or other network node may perform additional functions, such as initiate continuous geographic coordinate or geo-coordinate updates to the PSAP, if the emergency data message 306 is determined to be inclusive of certain content, such as hostage situation, by inspecting the abbreviated dialing code or other data); and
sending the initial communication to the human operator at the PSAP (see [0028]-[0030]; DMSC(O) 316 processes the emergency data message 306' for routing to emergency data message router; The DMSC(O) 316 perform functions previously defined to determine the proper PSAP; also see [0032]-[0035]; the PCDS 320 may determine whether any PSAPs local to the user 302 are compatible with the emergency data message 306' that is being communicated before selecting the PSAP to route the emergency data message 308a. In other words, an emergency data message sent in its original form may be best to provide to a PSAP in that same form to avoid loss of data, corruption of the data, or misinterpretation by a PSAP operator).
Although, and as set forth above, Ray discloses analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (see [0025]-[0026]) and sending the initial communication to the human operator at the PSAP (see [0028]-[0035]), Ray does not explicitly disclose analyzing content using at least one of natural language processing or machine learning; using a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP, wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication; receiving at least one response to the one or more questions; sending the initial communication, the one or more questions, and the at least one response to the human operator at the PSAP, wherein based on the determined classification, at least the initial communication is placed into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
Martin discloses analyze, using at least one of natural language processing or machine learning, content of the communication to the PSAP (see [0129]; ;the emergency data and/or communications (e.g., automated chat messages) undergoes natural language processing using one or more machine learning algorithms… to determine an emergency type);
use a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0008]; initiating the autonomous communication session comprises transmitting one or more messages comprising emergency response questions to the communication device according to a predetermined script... adapting the predetermined script during the autonomous communication session according to one or more responses from the user; also see [0021] and [0073]; determining a nature of the emergency; and determining the emergency category is based at least in part on the emergency information received through the interface of the electronic device and at least in part on the nature of the emergency. In some embodiments, the nature of the emergency is one of medical, fire, or police the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithms), wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication (see [0021]; determining a nature of the emergency; and b) wherein determining the emergency category is based at least in part on the emergency information received through the interface of the electronic device and at least in part on the nature of the emergency. In some embodiments, the nature of the emergency is one of medical, fire, or police; also see [0025]; processing the emergency data using an emergency classifier configured to identify the dispatch category for the emergency… applying a machine learning algorithm to the emergency data to determine the dispatch category; also see [0073]; the autonomous communication session 303 may respond by asking the user for more details regarding the emergency, as depicted in FIG. 5. In some embodiments, the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithm);
receiving at least one response to the one or more questions (see [0004]; gathering information without requiring human assistance; also see [0005]; when a person generates an emergency alert using a communication device (such as by dialing 9-1-1 on a mobile phone in the United States), an emergency management system (EMS) initiates an autonomous communication session with the user of the communication device through which the user can submit critical information regarding their emergency. The emergency information can be gathered through the autonomous communication session without requiring a human call-taker; also see [0008]; the emergency information extracted from the autonomous communication session comprises answers received from the user in response to the emergency response questions; also see [0073]; the EMS can pose questions to the user of the communication device regarding the user's location or the nature of the user's emergency); and
sending the initial communication (see [0113]; a call taker at a PSAP answers an emergency call), the one or more questions, and the at least one response to the human operator at the PSAP (see [0178]; The EMS responds with “Your emergency has been noted and delivered to your local PSAP”; also see [0183]; EMS also transmits the description of Caroline's emergency her local PSAP. Just after Caroline finishes tending to her wound according to the safety recommendation, her 9-1-1 call is picked up by a call taker at the local PSAP; also see question and answer displayed in Fig.7B:716; also see [0084]-[0085] in view of Fig.7B:760; the EMS has extracted emergency information from the autonomous communication session, and the emergency information 716 is now displayed within the GUI of the emergency response application 760. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 7B, the emergency information includes an address of the emergency, whether the emergency has been confirmed, the type of the emergency (e.g., fire), a severity of the emergency (e.g., critical), and a photo 708 of the emergency (e.g., the photo 608 transmitted to the EMS through the autonomous communication session depicted in FIG. 6). In some embodiments, a user of the emergency response application 760 can transmit or transfer emergency information extracted from an autonomous communication session to a computer aided dispatch (CAD) system, such as by selecting a Push to CAD button 718, as illustrated by FIG. 7B. In some embodiments, the EMS transmits emergency information extracted from an autonomous communication session in real-time. For example, in some embodiments, the EMS transmits answers from a user to questions posed through an autonomous communication session to an ESP as the answers are being received).
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 Martin with Ray to analyze, using at least one of natural language processing or machine learning, content of the communication to the PSAP; use a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP, wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication; receive at least one response to the one or more questions; and to send the initial communication, the one or more questions, and the at least one response to the human operator at the PSAP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Although, Martin also discloses that after a dispatch recommendation is sent to an emergency service provider, an incident is created within the ESP system (such as within a CAD system included in the ESP system) corresponding to the emergency alert for which the dispatch recommendation was created (see [0108]), Ray (modified by Martin) does not explicitly disclose based on the determined classification, placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
However, in an analogous art, Reddy teaches based on the determined classification, placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues (see Fig. 1:108) at the PSAP (see Fig. 1: 100; also see [0013]), wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue (see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0035]; emergency calls that have had their priority levels increased from a default level based on their associated transcripts can be moved to a dedicated critical call queue 108 displayed separately in the dashboard 114. In these examples, if any emergency calls are present in the critical call queue 108, they can be answered before operators 104 answer any emergency calls in the regular call queue 108), non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue (see Fig. 1:100; also see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0035]; emergency calls that have had their priority levels increased from a default level based on their associated transcripts can be moved to a dedicated critical call queue 108 displayed separately in the dashboard 114. In these examples, if any emergency calls are present in the critical call queue 108, they can be answered before operators 104 answer any emergency calls in the regular call queue 108; also see Fig. 3:108 that shows call queue 108 with "HIGH" call labels/ priority attribute; also see [0026]; value of the priority attribute can indicate one of a plurality of different possible priority levels, such as low, medium, and high priority or a priority level on a numeric scale; examiner articulates that it would be obvious modification to have separate queue 108 such as critical call queue 108 disclosed in [0035] for medium/ high priority calls), and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue (see Fig. 1:100; also see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0025]; call has the lowest priority by default; also see [0039]; a PSAP Management System 106 can place the emergency call on hold and add a representation of the emergency call to a call queue 108. The PSAP Management System 106 can assign a default priority level to the new emergency call; also see Fig. 3: 108 that shows call queue 108 with "Default" call labels/ priority attribute for communications that are not related to PSAP services, such as "everyone seems ok", or "I think my cat is stuck in a tree"; examiner articulates that it would be obvious modification to have separate queue 108 such as critical call queue 108 disclosed in [0035] for low/ default priority calls).
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 Reddy with Ray and Martin to place at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP based on the determined classification, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated SO that waiting emergency calls can be answered out of order based on assigned priorities to respond more quickly to waiting calls that have been identified as more urgent than other waiting calls (Reddy: [0013]).
Regarding claim 2, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the method of claim 1, as set forth above. In addition, Martin further discloses wherein the script is executed by a chat bot (see [0084] in view of Fig.7B:793B).
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 Martin with Ray and Reddy so that the script is executed by a chat bot.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Regarding claim 3, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the method of claim 1, as set forth above. In addition, Ray further discloses wherein the initial communication to the PSAP is a text communication (see [0024]; The emergency data message package (EDMP) 306 may include the emergency data message 308a that may include up to 160 characters, in the case of an SMS message, abbreviated dialing code 308b, and mobile directory number (MDN) 308c; also see [0029]-[0030]).
Regarding claim 4, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the method of claim 1, as set forth above. In addition, Martin further discloses wherein the initial communication to the PSAP and the at least one response are audio communications (see [0113]; a call taker at a PSAP answers an emergency call; see [0076]; a user can respond to one or more emergency response messages from the EMS by verbally responding to the one or more emergency response messages through the communication device, such as through a microphone built into the communication device) and the audio communications are converted to text before being sent to the human operator at the PSAP (see [0076]; verbal responses received from the user through a communication device during an interactive call are converted into text using speech-to-text technology).
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 Martin with Ray and Reddy so that the initial communication to the PSAP and the at least one response are audio communications and the audio communications are converted to text before being sent to the human operator at the PSAP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Regarding claim 5, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the method of claim 1, as set forth above. In addition, Martin further discloses wherein the initial communication is intercepted by a communication analysis engine (Fig.2:220) that is physically separate from the PSAP (Fig.2:230; also see [0066] in view of Fig.2:200 that show emergency service provider (ESP) 230 (“PSAP”) being physically separate entity than emergency management system (EMS) 220).
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 Martin with Ray and Reddy so that the initial communication to the PSAP and the at least one response are audio communications and the audio communications are converted to text before being sent to the human operator at the PSAP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Regarding claim 6, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the method of claim 1, as set forth above. In addition, Martin further discloses wherein the script is not fully executed if the initial communication is not related to PSAP services (see [0099]; when an emergency alert is generated for an emergency by an electronic device (such as a 9-1-1 call being dialed on a mobile phone in the United States), the emergency management system provides an emergency assistant application through an electronic device associated with the emergency alert to gather emergency information regarding the emergency and deliver safety recommendations to one or more persons potentially affected by the emergency… In some embodiments, the EMS determines a nature of the emergency and determines a likely emergency category for the emergency based at least in part on the emergency information received through the interface of the electronic device and at least in part on the nature of the emergency. In some embodiments, the nature of the emergency is one of medical, fire, or police; also see [0100]; after providing the emergency assistant application through an interface of the electronic device, the EMS access a decision tree 1471 for safety recommendations and steps through the decision tree using emergency information received through the interface of the electronic device to determine the likely emergency).
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 Martin with Ray and Reddy so that the script is not fully executed if the communication is not related to PSAP services.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Regarding claim 7, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the method of claim 1, as set forth above. In addition, Martin further discloses:
using the computer model to execute a fire script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a fire emergency PSAP communication (see [0073]-[0075] in view of Fig.5:506B “Fire”; the messages 304 are transmitted to the communication device 310 according to a predetermined script; the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithms; the sequence of messages transmitted to the user during the autonomous communication session 303 is adapted dynamically based on responses received from the user; also see Fig.7B:716; also see Fig.24:2484);
using the computer model to execute a medical emergency script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a medical emergency PSAP communication (see [0073]-[0075] in view of Fig.5:506B “Med”; also see Fig.14 that shows decision tree regarding “EMS bleeding” situation; also see Fig.12A:1203A); and
using the computer model to execute a crime script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a crime related emergency PSAP communication (see [0073]-[0075] in view of Fig.5:506B “Police”; also see Fig.14 that shows decision tree regarding “Police: life threatening” situation).
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 Martin with Ray and Reddy to use the computer model to execute a fire script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a fire emergency PSAP communication; use the computer model to execute a medical emergency script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a medical emergency PSAP communication; and to use the computer model to execute a crime script if the classification indicates the initial communication is a crime related emergency PSAP communication.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Regarding claim 8, Ray discloses a system (see Fig.3:316), comprising:
memory (see [0027]; DMSC(O) 316 may also include a memory 312b);
at least one processor (see [0027] in view of Fig.3:312a “processing unit”);
a communication analysis engine (see [0027] in view of Fig.3:312a “processing unit”) configured to:
intercept an initial communication to a public safety answering point (PSAP) (see [0030]; software on the device intercepts the email and reroutes it to the carrier's DMSC(O) for processing) before the initial communication reaches a human operator at the PSAP (see [0031]; determining PSAPs local to the user 302 and communications capabilities of PSAPs that are determined to be local to the user 302; determine the nearest emergency service provider as per the emergency type; also see [0032]-[0035]; before selecting the PSAP to route the emergency data message 308a), wherein the initial communication describes an event (see [0024]-[0025]; The emergency data message package (EDMP) 306 may include the emergency data message 308a that may include up to 160 characters, in the case of an SMS message, abbreviated dialing code 308b, and mobile directory number (MDN) 308c; The abbreviated dialing code 308b may be an alphanumeric code that is stored in the wireless communications device 304 and communicated with the emergency data message 308a to a mobile switching center (MSC) 310; For example, the abbreviated dialing codes may include "000000SOS1," "000000SOS2," "000000SOS3," and so on to indicate different types of emergencies and certain content in the emergency data messages. The different types of emergencies may include medical condition, automobile accident, fire, assault, or any other type of emergency data message that may be helpful to an operator at a PSAP for dispatching emergency personnel);
analyze content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (see [0025]-[0026]; The DMSC(O) 316 utilizes a process executed by a processing unit 312a that determines whether the emergency data message 308a is, in fact, an emergency data message being communicated to a PSAP or a standard data message, such as a text message being communicated between peers. In addition, the MSC 310, DMSC(O) 316, or other network node may perform additional functions, such as initiate continuous geographic coordinate or geo-coordinate updates to the PSAP, if the emergency data message 306 is determined to be inclusive of certain content, such as hostage situation, by inspecting the abbreviated dialing code or other data);
send the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0028]-[0030]; DMSC(O) 316 processes the emergency data message 306' for routing to emergency data message router; The DMSC(O) 316 perform functions previously defined to determine the proper PSAP; also see [0032]-[0035]; the PCDS 320 may determine whether any PSAPs local to the user 302 are compatible with the emergency data message 306' that is being communicated before selecting the PSAP to route the emergency data message 308a. In other words, an emergency data message sent in its original form may be best to provide to a PSAP in that same form to avoid loss of data, corruption of the data, or misinterpretation by a PSAP operator).
Although, and as set forth above, Ray discloses analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (see [0025]-[0026]) and sending the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0028]-[0035]), Ray does not explicitly disclose using a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP, wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication; based on one or more received responses to at least one of the one or more questions, obtaining details related to the initial communication; and sending the initial communication, the one or more questions, the one or more responses, and the obtained details related to the initial communication to the PSAP, wherein based on the determined classification, at least the initial communication is placed into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
Martin discloses use a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0008]; initiating the autonomous communication session comprises transmitting one or more messages comprising emergency response questions to the communication device according to a predetermined script... adapting the predetermined script during the autonomous communication session according to one or more responses from the user; also see [0021] and [0073]; determining a nature of the emergency; and determining the emergency category is based at least in part on the emergency information received through the interface of the electronic device and at least in part on the nature of the emergency. In some embodiments, the nature of the emergency is one of medical, fire, or police the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithms), wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication (see [0021]; determining a nature of the emergency; and b) wherein determining the emergency category is based at least in part on the emergency information received through the interface of the electronic device and at least in part on the nature of the emergency. In some embodiments, the nature of the emergency is one of medical, fire, or police; also see [0025]; processing the emergency data using an emergency classifier configured to identify the dispatch category for the emergency… applying a machine learning algorithm to the emergency data to determine the dispatch category; also see [0073]; the autonomous communication session 303 may respond by asking the user for more details regarding the emergency, as depicted in FIG. 5. In some embodiments, the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithm);
based on one or more received responses to at least one of the one or more questions, obtain details related to the initial communication (see [0004]; gathering information without requiring human assistance; also see [0005]; when a person generates an emergency alert using a communication device (such as by dialing 9-1-1 on a mobile phone in the United States), an emergency management system (EMS) initiates an autonomous communication session with the user of the communication device through which the user can submit critical information regarding their emergency. The emergency information can be gathered through the autonomous communication session without requiring a human call-taker; also see [0008]; the emergency information extracted from the autonomous communication session comprises answers received from the user in response to the emergency response questions; also see [0073] and [0075]; EMS extracts emergency information from the autonomous communication session by parsing free response responses submitted by the user during the autonomous communication session. Parsing free response responses submitted by the user during the autonomous communication session may include parsing the responses for key words or phrases; also see [0079]; non-user input data is obtained by querying third party databases that the EMS has authorization to access); and
sending the initial communication (see [0113]; a call taker at a PSAP answers an emergency call), the one or more questions, the one or more responses, and the obtained details related to the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0178]; The EMS responds with “Your emergency has been noted and delivered to your local PSAP”; also see [0183]; EMS also transmits the description of Caroline's emergency her local PSAP. Just after Caroline finishes tending to her wound according to the safety recommendation, her 9-1-1 call is picked up by a call taker at the local PSAP; also see question and answer, along with comments and media displayed in Fig.7B:716; also see [0084]-[0085] in view of Fig.7B:760; the EMS has extracted emergency information from the autonomous communication session, and the emergency information 716 is now displayed within the GUI of the emergency response application 760. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 7B, the emergency information includes an address of the emergency, whether the emergency has been confirmed, the type of the emergency (e.g., fire), a severity of the emergency (e.g., critical), and a photo 708 of the emergency (e.g., the photo 608 transmitted to the EMS through the autonomous communication session depicted in FIG. 6). In some embodiments, a user of the emergency response application 760 can transmit or transfer emergency information extracted from an autonomous communication session to a computer aided dispatch (CAD) system, such as by selecting a Push to CAD button 718, as illustrated by FIG. 7B. In some embodiments, the EMS transmits emergency information extracted from an autonomous communication session in real-time. For example, in some embodiments, the EMS transmits answers from a user to questions posed through an autonomous communication session to an ESP as the answers are being received).
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 Martin with Ray for using a computer model to execute a script and communicate one or more questions from the script to a user associated with the initial communication to the PSAP, wherein the script is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication; based on one or more received responses to at least one of the one or more questions, obtaining details related to the initial communication; and for sending the initial communication, the one or more questions, the one or more responses, and the obtained details related to the initial communication to the PSAP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Although, Martin also discloses that after a dispatch recommendation is sent to an emergency service provider, an incident is created within the ESP system (such as within a CAD system included in the ESP system) corresponding to the emergency alert for which the dispatch recommendation was created (see [0108]), Ray (modified by Martin) does not explicitly disclose wherein based on the determined classification, at least the initial communication is placed into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
However, in an analogous art, Reddy teaches based on the determined classification, at least the initial communication is placed into one of a plurality of priority queues (see Fig. 1:108) at the PSAP (see Fig. 1: 100; also see [0013]), wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue (see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0035]; emergency calls that have had their priority levels increased from a default level based on their associated transcripts can be moved to a dedicated critical call queue 108 displayed separately in the dashboard 114. In these examples, if any emergency calls are present in the critical call queue 108, they can be answered before operators 104 answer any emergency calls in the regular call queue 108), non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue (see Fig. 1:100; also see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0035]; emergency calls that have had their priority levels increased from a default level based on their associated transcripts can be moved to a dedicated critical call queue 108 displayed separately in the dashboard 114. In these examples, if any emergency calls are present in the critical call queue 108, they can be answered before operators 104 answer any emergency calls in the regular call queue 108; also see Fig. 3:108 that shows call queue 108 with "HIGH" call labels/ priority attribute; also see [0026]; value of the priority attribute can indicate one of a plurality of different possible priority levels, such as low, medium, and high priority or a priority level on a numeric scale; examiner articulates that it would be obvious modification to have separate queue 108 such as critical call queue 108 disclosed in [0035] for medium/ high priority calls), and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue (see Fig. 1:100; also see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0025]; call has the lowest priority by default; also see [0039]; a PSAP Management System 106 can place the emergency call on hold and add a representation of the emergency call to a call queue 108. The PSAP Management System 106 can assign a default priority level to the new emergency call; also see Fig. 3: 108 that shows call queue 108 with "Default" call labels/ priority attribute for communications that are not related to PSAP services, such as "everyone seems ok", or "I think my cat is stuck in a tree"; examiner articulates that it would be obvious modification to have separate queue 108 such as critical call queue 108 disclosed in [0035] for low/ default priority calls).
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 Reddy with Ray and Martin to place at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP based on the determined classification, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated so that waiting emergency calls can be answered out of order based on assigned priorities to respond more quickly to waiting calls that have been identified as more urgent than other waiting calls (Reddy: [0013]).
Regarding claim 15, Ray discloses a method, comprising:
receiving an initial communication sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP) (see [0023]; user 302 using a wireless communications device 304 to communicate emergency data messages to public safety answering points; also see [0024]; The user 302 may send an emergency data message package 306 by making an emergency data message request on the wireless communications device 304);
intercepting the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0030]; software on the device intercepts the email and reroutes it to the carrier's DMSC(O) for processing) before the initial communication reaches a human operator at the PSAP (see [0031]; determining PSAPs local to the user 302 and communications capabilities of PSAPs that are determined to be local to the user 302; determine the nearest emergency service provider as per the emergency type; also see [0032]-[0035]; before selecting the PSAP to route the emergency data message 308a); and
analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (see [0025]-[0026]; The DMSC(O) 316 utilizes a process executed by a processing unit 312a that determines whether the emergency data message 308a is, in fact, an emergency data message being communicated to a PSAP or a standard data message, such as a text message being communicated between peers. In addition, the MSC 310, DMSC(O) 316, or other network node may perform additional functions, such as initiate continuous geographic coordinate or geo-coordinate updates to the PSAP, if the emergency data message 306 is determined to be inclusive of certain content, such as hostage situation, by inspecting the abbreviated dialing code or other data).
Although, and as set forth above, Ray discloses analyzing content of the initial communication to the PSAP to determine whether a classification for the initial communication is an emergency classification, a non-emergency classification, or a not related to PSAP services classification (see [0025]-[0026]), Ray does not explicitly disclose using a chat bot to engage in a chat or dialogue with user associated with the initial communication to obtain additional details related to the initial communication, wherein the chat or dialogue is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication; sending the chat or dialogue and the obtained additional details related to the initial communication to the PSAP; and placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non- emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
Martin discloses receiving an initial communication sent to a public safety answering point (PSAP) (see [0004]-[0005] and [0066]; example of emergency service provider (ESP) are a public safety answering point (PSAP), or an emergency dispatch center; also see [0012]; identifying the user potentially affected by the emergency comprises: a) detecting an emergency call made from the communication device to the emergency service provider (ESP); and b) determining that the ESP is unable to respond to the emergency call, wherein the emergency response message is transmitted to the communication device in response to determining that the ESP is unable to respond to the emergency call; also see [0177]-[0178] & [0182]; smart speaker begins dialing 9-1-1. Simultaneously, the smart speaker sends an emergency alert to the emergency management system (EMS));
using a chat bot (see [0084] in view of Fig.7B:793B) to engage in a chat or dialogue with user associated with the initial communication to obtain additional details related to the initial communication (see [0008]; initiating the autonomous communication session comprises transmitting one or more messages comprising emergency response questions to the communication device according to a predetermined script... adapting the predetermined script during the autonomous communication session according to one or more responses from the user; also see [0021] and [0073]; the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithms; also see [0004]; gathering information without requiring human assistance; also see [0005]; when a person generates an emergency alert using a communication device (such as by dialing 9-1-1 on a mobile phone in the United States), an emergency management system (EMS) initiates an autonomous communication session with the user of the communication device through which the user can submit critical information regarding their emergency. The emergency information can be gathered through the autonomous communication session without requiring a human call-taker; also see [0008]; the emergency information extracted from the autonomous communication session comprises answers received from the user in response to the emergency response questions; also see [0073]), wherein the chat or dialogue is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication (see [0021]; determining a nature of the emergency; and b) wherein determining the emergency category is based at least in part on the emergency information received through the interface of the electronic device and at least in part on the nature of the emergency. In some embodiments, the nature of the emergency is one of medical, fire, or police; also see [0025]; processing the emergency data using an emergency classifier configured to identify the dispatch category for the emergency… applying a machine learning algorithm to the emergency data to determine the dispatch category; also see [0073]; the autonomous communication session 303 may respond by asking the user for more details regarding the emergency, as depicted in FIG. 5. In some embodiments, the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithm); and
sending the chat or dialogue and the obtained additional details related to the initial communication to the PSAP (see [0178]; The EMS responds with “Your emergency has been noted and delivered to your local PSAP”; also see [0183]; EMS also transmits the description of Caroline's emergency her local PSAP. Just after Caroline finishes tending to her wound according to the safety recommendation, her 9-1-1 call is picked up by a call taker at the local PSAP).
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 Martin with Ray for using a chat bot to engage in a chat or dialogue with user associated with the initial communicate to obtain additional details related to the initial communication, wherein the chat or dialogue is at least partially based on the determined classification of the initial communication; and sending the chat or dialogue and the obtained additional details related to the initial communication to the PSAP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Although, Martin also discloses that after a dispatch recommendation is sent to an emergency service provider, an incident is created within the ESP system (such as within a CAD system included in the ESP system) corresponding to the emergency alert for which the dispatch recommendation was created (see [0108]), Ray (modified by Martin) does not explicitly disclose placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
However, in an analogous art, Reddy teaches placing at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues (see Fig. 1:108) at the PSAP (see Fig. 1: 100; also see [0013]), wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue (see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0035]; emergency calls that have had their priority levels increased from a default level based on their associated transcripts can be moved to a dedicated critical call queue 108 displayed separately in the dashboard 114. In these examples, if any emergency calls are present in the critical call queue 108, they can be answered before operators 104 answer any emergency calls in the regular call queue 108), non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue (see Fig. 1:100; also see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0035]; emergency calls that have had their priority levels increased from a default level based on their associated transcripts can be moved to a dedicated critical call queue 108 displayed separately in the dashboard 114. In these examples, if any emergency calls are present in the critical call queue 108, they can be answered before operators 104 answer any emergency calls in the regular call queue 108; also see Fig. 3:108 that shows call queue 108 with "HIGH" call labels/ priority attribute; also see [0026]; value of the priority attribute can indicate one of a plurality of different possible priority levels, such as low, medium, and high priority or a priority level on a numeric scale; examiner articulates that it would be obvious modification to have separate queue 108 such as critical call queue 108 disclosed in [0035] for medium/ high priority calls), and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue (see Fig. 1:100; also see [0013]; determine the nature of the emergency associated with the calls on hold. The calls can thus be prioritized within a call queue based on the nature of the emergency; also see [0025]; call has the lowest priority by default; also see [0039]; a PSAP Management System 106 can place the emergency call on hold and add a representation of the emergency call to a call queue 108. The PSAP Management System 106 can assign a default priority level to the new emergency call; also see Fig. 3: 108 that shows call queue 108 with "Default" call labels/ priority attribute for communications that are not related to PSAP services, such as "everyone seems ok", or "I think my cat is stuck in a tree"; examiner articulates that it would be obvious modification to have separate queue 108 such as critical call queue 108 disclosed in [0035] for low/ default priority calls).
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 Reddy with Ray and Martin to place at least the initial communication into one of a plurality of priority queues at the PSAP based on the determined classification, wherein emergency classifications are placed into a highest priority queue, non-emergency classifications are placed into a medium priority queue, and not related to PSAP services classifications are placed into a lowest priority queue.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated so that waiting emergency calls can be answered out of order based on assigned priorities to respond more quickly to waiting calls that have been identified as more urgent than other waiting calls (Reddy: [0013]).
As for Claim 9, the claim depends on claim 8, but does not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 2. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 2.
As for Claims 10 and 16, the claims depend on claims 8 and 15 respectively, but does not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 3. Therefore, claims 10 and 16 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 3.
Regarding claim 11, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the system of claim 8, as set forth above. In addition, Ray further discloses wherein the initial communication is intercepted before it reaches the PSAP (see [0030]; software on the device intercepts the email and reroutes it to the carrier's DMSC(O) for processing; also see [0031]; determining PSAPs local to the user 302 and communications capabilities of PSAPs that are determined to be local to the user 302; determine the nearest emergency service provider as per the emergency type; also see [0032]-[0035]; before selecting the PSAP to route the emergency data message 308a).
As for Claim 17, the claim depends on claim 15, but does not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 11. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 11.
As for Claims 12 and 18, the claims depend on claims 8 and 17 respectively, but does not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 5. Therefore, claims 12 and 18 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 5.
As for Claim 13, the claim depends on claim 8, but does not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 6. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 6.
As for Claims 14 and 20, the claims depend on claims 8 and 15 respectively, but does not teach or further define over the limitations in claim 7. Therefore, claims 14 and 20 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 19, Ray (modified by Martin and Reddy) discloses the method of claim 15, as set forth above. In addition, Martin further discloses wherein a script is used as a guide for the chat bot to engage in the chat or dialogue (see [0008]; initiating the autonomous communication session comprises transmitting one or more messages comprising emergency response questions to the communication device according to a predetermined script... adapting the predetermined script during the autonomous communication session according to one or more responses from the user; also see [0012]; predetermined script is adapted according to a decision tree; also see [0021] and [0073]; the predetermined script or sequence of messages is trained or generated using machine learning algorithms).
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 Martin with Ray and Reddy so that a script is used as a guide for the chat bot to engage in the chat or dialogue.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce the time required to complete a dispatch card and potentially significantly increase the likelihood of a successful emergency response (Martin: see [0110]).
Additional References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chin et al. (US 20040176123 A1) communicates with PSAP via messages.
Davis et al. (US 20160316493 A1) teaches NG-PSAP administration via text messaging.
Poremba et al. (US 20110009086 A1) discloses text to 9-1-1 emergency communication.
ZENTNER et al. (US 20150031324 A1) teaches a method to provide context-aware linkage between NG9-1-1 SMS and public safety incident.
Burt (US 20150312739 A1) discloses the civilian user may first be placed in communication with an intermediary ES user, such as an emergency services operator (i.e., 9-1-1 operator) before facilitating the eventual establishment of a communications link.
Cuff et al. (US 20130267189 A1) discloses rerouting emergency services incoming text message responsibility in an event that terminals at a given service bureau are unavailable for use.
GOODSON et al. (US 20130171958 A1) teaches text messaging 911 calls.
Kinsey et al. (US 11818791 B2) discloses text based 911 communication.
Vislocky (US 10791221 B1) teaches comprehensive testing for NG9-1-1 emergency call.
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 SANDARVA KHANAL whose telephone number is (571)272-8107. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI, 0800-1700.
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, Kamal B Divecha can be reached at 571-272-5863. 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.
/SANDARVA KHANAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights