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
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the references in combination fail to disclose the newly amended limitations.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Polleri discloses “and the first expected communication parameter set comprises a first channel type parameter associated with a first channel type for the first communication channel (attributes associated with the communication/entities, refer to par 0195, 0197). ….. and the second expected communication parameter set comprises a second channel type parameter associated with a second channel type for the second communication channel (refer to par 0195, 0197)… the first channel type parameter and the second channel type parameter (refer to par 0010, 0104, 0174. 0180, 0316, 0305- create label based on feature of the dataset and the feature datasets can identify and select feature that are predictive for each type of feature data).”
Therefore, the arguments are not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1- 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Polleri et al hereinafter Polleri (US 20230336340) in view of Steenstra et al hereinafter Steenstra (US 2024/0135291).
Referring to Claim 1. Polleri discloses an apparatus comprising one or more processors and one or more storage devices storing instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to cause the one or more processors to:
receive a first service message object via a first communication channel of a plurality of communication channels (receive message, through a messaging channel, refer to par 0106, 0111, 0120, 0170, 0140), wherein the first service message object defines a first feature dataset associated with the first communication channel (message contains a intendent state, refer to par 0123, 0124, 0171, 0193), and wherein the first communication channel defines a first expected communication parameter set (each content has different type of format, connector would be able to normalize expected range of different type of format, refer to par 0173); and the first expected communication parameter set comprises a first channel type parameter associated with a first channel type for the first communication channel (attributes associated with the communication/entities, refer to par 0195, 0197).
receive a second service message object via a second communication channel of the plurality of communication channels (multiple different user with different channel, refer to par 0106, 0111, 0120, 0134, 0170), wherein the second service message object defines a second feature dataset associated with the second communication channel (refer to par 0123, 0124, 0171), and wherein the second communication channel defines a second expected communication parameter set (each content has different type of format, connector would be able to normalize expected range of different type of format, refer to par 0173); and the second expected communication parameter set comprises a second channel type parameter associated with a second channel type for the second communication channel (refer to par 0195, 0197).
generate support labels for the first service message object and the second service message object based at least in part, respectively, on the first feature dataset and on the second feature dataset (refer to par 0130, 0132, 0174); and
correlate the support labels for the first service message object and the second service message object to respective resolution data objects related to one or more resolution actions based at least in part, respectively, on the first channel type parameter and the second channel type parameter (refer to par 0010, 0104, 0174. 0180, 0316, 0305- create label based on feature of the dataset and the feature datasets can identify and select feature that are predictive for each type of feature data);
Steenstra, in analogous art, is introduced to expedite the prosecution by further emphasize it is well known in the art for the following limitation
“correlate the support labels for the first service message object and the second service message object to respective resolution data objects related to one or more resolution actions based at least in part, respectively, on the first expected communication parameter set and on the second expected communication parameter set (refer to par0102, 0103, 0143-0144)”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Polleri and Steenstra because Steenstra’s teaching would allow the system to collaborate with other users in order to satisfying the technological needs offered as a service.
Referring to Claim 2. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
generate the support labels for the first service message object and the second service message object in response to a determination that the first feature dataset and the second feature dataset satisfy defined intent criteria for an intent model (refer to par 0010, 0104, 0174. 0180, 0316).
Referring to Claim 3. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
generate a response message object for a client device via a communication channel of the plurality of communication channels in response to a determination that the first feature dataset and the second feature dataset do not satisfy defined intent criteria for an intent model (refer to par 0127);
receive at least a third first service message object via at least a third communication channel of the plurality of communication channels, wherein the third service message object defines a third feature dataset associated with the third communication channel, and wherein the third communication channel defines a third expected communication parameter set (refer to par 0134, 0106, 0111, 0120, 0134, 0170, 0123, 0124, 0171, 0173); and
generate a support label for the third service message object based at least in part on the third feature dataset (refer to par 0010, 0104, 0174. 0180, 0316).
Referring to Claim 4. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
generate the first feature dataset or the second feature dataset based at least in part on a feature extraction process that extracts one or more text features from the first service message object or the second service message object (refer to par 0115, 0123).
Referring to Claim 5. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
generate the respective resolution data objects based at least in part on a generative machine learning model or a generative system configured for generating data that represents at least a portion of a resolution action for a service message object (refer to par 0123).
Referring to Claim 6. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
correlate the support labels for the first service message object and the second service message object to the respective resolution data objects based at least in part on a machine reading comprehension model configured for providing resolution predictions related to services messages (refer to par 0041, 0178).
Referring to Claim 7. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
generate a resolution message object for a client device based at least in part on the respective resolution data objects, wherein the resolution message object is configured to render visual data associated with the respective resolution data objects via a user interface of the client device (refer to par 0088, 0102).
Referring to Claim 8. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
query a knowledge base system based at least in part on the respective resolution data objects to determine a resolution message object for a client device (refer to par 0216).
Referring to Claim 9. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the one or more storage devices store instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to further cause the one or more processors to:
route a resolution ticket data object to a support device based at least in part on the respective resolution data objects (refer to par 0122, 0216).
Referring to Claim 10. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the first communication channel and the second communication channel respectively correspond to an email communication channel, a network portal interface communication channel, a user interface widget communication channel, a chat communication channel, or an application programming interface (API) communication channel (refer to par 0173).
Referring to Claim 11. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the support labels for the first service message object and the second service message object comprise at least one support label from a group consisting of an intent classification label, a request type label, a message type label, a user identifier label, a location label, and a timestamp label for the respective services messages (refer to par 0197, 0198).
Referring to Claim 12. Polleri and Steenstra disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, Polleri discloses wherein the first feature dataset, the first communication channel, and the first expected communication parameter set are each respectively different from the second feature dataset, the second communication channel, and the second expected communication parameter set (different channels has different type of parameter sets, such as type, version, etc, refer to par 0193).
Referring to Claims 13 – 20, claims are rejected under similar rational as claims 1-12.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 KAREN C TANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3116. The examiner can normally be reached on 7am - 4pm.
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, Joon H Hwang can be reached on (571) 272-4036. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAREN C TANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
Prosecution Insights