CTNF 18/633,438 CTNF 94553 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 AIA A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/21/2026 has been entered. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-16, 18-21 are currently pending in the application and have been examined. Response to Amendment The amendment filed 05/21/26 has been entered. Response to Arguments Claim Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 101: Applicant submits on page 14 of the remarks that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea. Examiner notes that under step 2A of the analysis of claims per the Alice framework, if a claim limitation covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Applicant submits on page 15 of the remarks that the claims are integrated into a practical application. Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that the present claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application in a matter that imposes meaningful limit to the judicial exception. Claim Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-10, 12-16, 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patentable subject matter. The claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. With respect to claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-16, 18-21, the independent claims (claims 1, 8 and 15) are directed, in part, to a computer program product, a method and a computing device for collaborative scheduling. Step 1 – Independent claims 1 (computer program product), 8 (method), and 15 (computing device) and their dependent claims 2-3, 5-7, 21, 9-10, 12-13, 16, 18-20, respectively, fall within at least one of the four statutory categories of 35 U.S.C. 101: (i) process; (ii) machine; (iii) manufacture; or (iv) composition of matter. Claim 1 is directed to a computer program product (i.e. article of manufacture). Claim 8 is directed to a method (i.e. process), and claim 15 is directed to a computing device (i.e. machine). However, these claim elements are considered to be abstract ideas because they are directed to a method of organizing human activity which includes managing personal behavior or interactions between people. As per Step 2A - Prong 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, the claims are directed, in part, to operating a robotic process automation (RPA) agent in a background of an electronic meeting, wherein the RPA agent is an automated software application that observes an application performing an action, and performs automation by repeating the action; detecting, by the RPA agent in real-time, schedule-based topics and vocalized scheduling conflicts from spoken conversations of a plurality of participants in the electronic meeting; receiving, from the RPA agent, data related to the detected schedule-based topics and the detected vocalized scheduling conflicts; forwarding the received data to an artificial intelligence engine; processing, by the artificial intelligence engine, the received data using one or more word recognition techniques comprising natural language processing (NLP), a speech recognition module, an optical character recognition (OCR) module, and a chat text recognition module to analyze the spoken conversations in the electronic meeting; determining, by the artificial intelligence engine, scheduling intent behind words expressed by a participant of the plurality of participants, wherein the artificial intelligence engine interprets time or schedule related speech that is not explicit in the spoken conversations to determine availability of the participant in an upcoming schedule; determining, by a data analytics module, correlations between the determined availability of the participant and commitments of the participant in the upcoming schedule; minimizing scheduling conflicts between the plurality of participants by prioritizing schedules of key participants of the plurality of participants over schedules of non-key participants of the plurality of participants, wherein the scheduling conflicts are associated with the detected vocalized scheduling conflicts, the detected schedule-based topics, and the correlations determined by the data analytics module, and the minimizing is performed based on at least roles of the plurality of participants; determining, by the artificial intelligence engine, based on the minimizing of the scheduling conflicts, a recommended schedule of workflow completion for tasks related to topics of the electronic meeting; and displaying, by the RPA agent, the recommended schedule. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation covers an observation or evaluation, then it falls under the “mental process” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. As per Step 2A - Prong 2 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application . In particular, the claim recites additional elements: computer program product comprising: one or more computer readable storage media, artificial intelligence engine, robotic process automation agent, computing device, processor, teleconferencing program, memory, natural language processing, speech recognition module, optical character recognition module, chat text recognition module. These additional element in both steps are recited at a high-level of generality ( i.e. , as a generic device performing a generic computer function of receiving and storing data) such that these elements amount no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Examiner looks to Applicant’s specification in at least figures 1 and 2 and related text and [0030-0032] to understand that the invention may be implemented in a generic environment that “Computing environment 100 includes an example of an environment for the execution of at least some of the computer code involved in performing the inventive methods, such as the improved collaborative scheduling code 200. The improved collaborative scheduling code 200 may include a collaborative scheduling recommendation engine 240 and a robotic process automation (RPA) agent 250 that cooperate to generate recommended schedules for the collaboration of multiple parties working together on a project or set of dependent tasks. The collaborative scheduling recommendation engine 240 may operate as a backend process that receives data from the RPA agent 250 that is actively listening to conversations amongst the collaborating parties. The collaborative scheduling recommendation engine 240 and/or RPA agent 250 may operate according to one or more of the methods disclosed in further detail below. In addition to collaborative scheduling code 200, computing environment 100 includes, for example, computer 101, wide area network (WAN) 102, end user device (EUD) 103, remote server 104, public cloud 105, and private cloud 106. In this embodiment, computer 101 includes processor set 110 (including processing circuitry 120 and cache 121), communication fabric 111, volatile memory 112, persistent storage 113 (including operating system 122 and collaborative scheduling code 200, as identified above), peripheral device set 114 (including user interface (UI) device set 123, storage 124, and Internet of Things (IoT) sensor set 125), and network module 115. Remote server 104 includes remote database 130. Public cloud 105 includes gateway 140, cloud orchestration module 141, host physical machine set 142, virtual machine set 143, and container set 144. COMPUTER 101 may take the form of a desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet computer, smart phone, smart watch or other wearable computer, mainframe computer, quantum computer or any other form of computer or mobile device now known or to be developed in the future that is capable of running a program, accessing a network or querying a database, such as remote database 130. As is well understood in the art of computer technology, and depending upon the technology, performance of a computer-implemented method may be distributed among multiple computers and/or between multiple locations. On the other hand, in this presentation of computing environment 100, detailed discussion is focused on a single computer, specifically computer 101, to keep the presentation as simple as possible. Computer 101 may be located in a cloud, even though it is not shown in a cloud in Figure 1. On the other hand, computer 101 is not required to be in a cloud except to any extent as may be affirmatively indicated. PROCESSOR SET 110 includes one, or more, computer processors of any type now known or to be developed in the future. For the instant disclosure, the processor set 110 includes for example a central processing unit (CPU) and an accelerator. In some embodiments, a different type of processing element may be used instead of the CPU, (for example, a GPU or other process dedicated/specialized unit). Processing circuitry 120 may be distributed over multiple packages, for example, multiple, coordinated integrated circuit chips. Processing circuitry 120 may implement multiple processor threads and/or multiple processor cores. Cache 121 is memory that is located in the processor chip package(s) and is typically used for data or code that should be available for rapid access by the threads or cores running on processor set 110. Cache memories are typically organized into multiple levels depending upon relative proximity to the processing circuitry. Alternatively, some, or all, of the cache for the processor set may be located “off chip.” In some computing environments, processor set 110 may be designed for working with qubits and performing quantum computing.” Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they are mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. As per Step 2B of the subject matter eligibility analysis, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional elements are mere instructions to apply the abstract idea on a computer. When considered individually, these claim elements only contribute generic recitations of technical elements to the claims. It is readily apparent, for example, that the claim is not directed to any specific improvements of these elements and the invention is not directed to a technical improvement. When the claims are considered individually and as a whole, the additional elements noted above, appear to merely apply the abstract concept to a technical environment in a very general sense – i.e. a generic computer receives information from another generic computer, processes the information and then sends information back. In addition, when taken as an ordered combination, the ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present as when the elements are taken individually. Their collective functions merely provide generic computer implementation. Therefore, when viewed as a whole, these additional claim elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a practical application of the abstract idea or that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. The most significant elements of the claims, that is the elements that really outline the inventive elements of the claims, are set forth in the elements identified as an abstract idea. The fact that the generic computing devices are facilitating the abstract concept is not enough to confer statutory subject matter eligibility. The dependent claims further refine the abstract idea. These claims do not provide a meaningful linking to the judicial exception. Rather, these claims offer further descriptive limitations of elements found in the independent claims and addressed above – such as by describing the nature and content of the data that is received/sent. While these descriptive elements may provide further helpful context for the claimed invention these elements do not serve to confer subject matter eligibility to the invention since their individual and combined significance is still not significantly more than the abstract concepts at the core of the claimed invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries 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 present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-3, 5-10, 12-16, 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 2023/0412414 (hereinafter; Wang) in view of US Pub. No. 2025/0150554 (hereinafter; Chan) . Regarding claims 1/8/15, Wang discloses: A computer program product; A computer implemented method; A computing device for electronic collaborative scheduling, (Wang [0013] discloses a meeting scheduling process.) the computer program product comprising: one or more computer readable storage media, and program instructions collectively stored on the one or more computer readable storage media to execute operations comprising: operating a robotic process automation (RPA) agent in a background of an electronic meeting, (Wang [0001] discloses teleconference meetings and in particular, a meeting robot system.) wherein the RPA agent is an automated software application that observes an application performing an action, and performs automation by repeating the action; (Wang [0006] discloses The method includes as a result of a trigger, automatically: joining, by the meeting substitute system, the teleconference meeting at the date and the time.) detecting, by the RPA agent in real-time, schedule-based topics and vocalized scheduling conflicts from spoken conversations of a plurality of participants in the electronic meeting; (Wang [0085] discloses the meeting substitute system 12 may determine when the meeting is over and based on such determination, may automatically stop capturing the set of meeting data (e.g., stop recording and stop the speech-to-text translation) and may then initiate the generation of the meeting summary. The recording is performed in real-time during the meeting; [0033] discloses the present disclosure may advantageously provide a meeting robot/meeting substitute system that may assist meeting invitees with solving the meeting conflict problem.) receiving, from the RPA agent, data related to the detected schedule-based topics and the detected vocalized scheduling conflicts; (Wang [0085] discloses the meeting substitute system 12 may determine when the meeting is over and based on such determination, may automatically stop capturing the set of meeting data (e.g., stop recording and stop the speech-to-text translation) and may then initiate the generation of the meeting summary. The recording is performed in real-time during the meeting, but the meeting summary may be generated after the meeting. After the meeting summary is generated, the meeting substitute system 12 may send the meeting notification to provide the user with access to the meeting data and/or the meeting summary; [0033] discloses the present disclosure may advantageously provide a meeting robot/meeting substitute system that may assist meeting invitees with solving the meeting conflict problem.) forwarding the received data to an artificial intelligence engine; processing, by the artificial intelligence engine, the received data using one or more word recognition techniques comprising natural language processing (NLP), a speech recognition module, an optical character recognition (OCR) module, and a chat text recognition module to analyze the spoken conversations in the electronic meeting: (Wang [0009] discloses generating the meeting summary includes providing the speech-to-text translation of the teleconference meeting to at least one natural language processing model to generate a text-based meeting summary. See also [0018-0019].) determining, by the artificial intelligence engine, scheduling intent behind words expressed by a participant of the plurality of participants, wherein the artificial intelligence engine interprets time or schedule related speech that is not explicit in the spoken conversations to determine availability of the participant in an upcoming schedule; (Wang [0061-0062] disclose speech to text translation and meeting events scheduling.) determining, by a data analytics module, correlations between the determined availability of the participant and commitments of the participant in the upcoming schedule; (Wang [0032] discloses meeting conflicts.) minimizing scheduling conflicts between the plurality of participants by prioritizing schedules of key participants of the plurality of participants over schedules of non-key participants of the plurality of participants, wherein the scheduling conflicts are associated with the detected vocalized scheduling conflicts, the detected schedule-based topics, and the correlations determined by the data analytics module, and the minimizing is performed based on roles of the plurality of participants; (Wang [0032-0033] disclose conflicting meetings; [0061-0062] disclose speech to text translation and meeting events scheduling.) Although Wang discloses methods and systems for a meeting robot, Wang does not specifically disclose recommendations or a display. However, Chan discloses the following limitations: determining, by the artificial intelligence engine, based on the minimizing of the scheduling conflicts, a recommended schedule of workflow completion for tasks related to topics of the electronic meeting; (Chan discloses recommendations in at least [0072-0073].) and displaying, by the RPA agent, the recommended schedule. (Chan [0069] discloses a display screen.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the meeting robot of Want with the system of digital delegates for meetings and conferences of Chan in order to access a teleconference and determine responses to points of interest in a meeting (Chan abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned. Regarding claims 2/9/16, Wang discloses: The computer program product of claim 1; The computer implemented method of claim 8; The computing device of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: continuously monitoring the electronic meeting for additional data related to the detected schedule-based topics; (Wang discloses monitoring meeting info in at least [0022]; [0062].) Although Wang discloses methods and systems for a meeting robot, Wang does not specifically disclose recommendations or a display. However, Chan discloses the following limitations: determining a revised recommended schedule based on the additional data related to the detected schedule-based topics; (Chan discloses recommendations in at least [0072-0073].) and displaying, by the RPA agent, the revised recommended schedule. (Chan [0069] discloses a display screen.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the meeting robot of Want with the system of digital delegates for meetings and conferences of Chan in order to access a teleconference and determine responses to points of interest in a meeting (Chan abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned. Regarding claims 3/10, Wang discloses, The computer program product of claim 1; The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the received data includes verbal speech, typed text, and individual personal calendars. (Wang discloses speech and text in at least [0006]; [0009]; [0013]; [0070] discloses user’s calendars.) Regarding claims 5/12/18, Wang discloses, The computer program product of claim 1; The computer-implemented method of claim 8; The computing device of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise determining an individual source associated with an instance of the received data. (Wang [0070] discloses information from electronic calendar platform Outlook Calendar.) Regarding claims 6/13/19, Although Wang discloses methods and systems for a meeting robot and scheduling conflicts, Wang does not specifically disclose recommendations or a display. However, Chan discloses the following limitations: The computer program product of claim 1; The computer-implemented method of claim 8; The computing device of claim 15, wherein the displaying of the recommended schedule includes a display of at least one minimized scheduling conflict of the minimized scheduling conflicts. (Chan discloses recommendations in at least [0072-0073]; [0069] discloses a display screen.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the meeting robot of Want with the system of digital delegates for meetings and conferences of Chan in order to access a teleconference and determine responses to points of interest in a meeting (Chan abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned. Regarding claims 7/20, Wang discloses: The computer program product of claim 1; The computing device of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: displaying a confirmation of an acceptance of the recommended schedule to the plurality of participants; (Wang discloses accepting a meeting request in at least [0012]; [0021].) receiving a declination of the acceptance by one or more participants of the plurality of participants; (Wang [0069] discloses user may determine that he cannot attend the meeting requested.) Although Wang discloses methods and systems for a meeting robot, Wang does not specifically disclose recommendations or a display. However, Chan discloses the following limitations: continuously monitoring the electronic meeting for additional data related to the detected schedule-based topics; determining a revised recommended schedule based on the additional data related to the detected schedule-based topics; (Chan discloses recommendations in at least [0072-0073].) and displaying, by the RPA agent, the revised recommended schedule. (Chan [0069] discloses a display screen.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the meeting robot of Want with the system of digital delegates for meetings and conferences of Chan in order to access a teleconference and determine responses to points of interest in a meeting (Chan abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned. Regarding claim 21, Wang discloses: The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: continuously executing, in a computing device associated with the electronic meeting, the RPA agent to detect events outside the electronic meeting, wherein the events comprise messages related to a project associated with the electronic meeting, changes in a calendar of a participant of the plurality of participants, missed deadlines for the project, and deadlines of a project meeting that impact the project associated with the electronic meeting, wherein the project meeting is different from the electronic meeting; (Wang discloses monitoring meeting info in at least [0013] [0022]; [0062].) Although Wang discloses methods and systems for a meeting robot, Wang does not specifically disclose recommendations or a display. However, Chan discloses the following limitations: determining, by the artificial intelligence engine and based on the detecting of the events outside the electronic meeting, a modified recommended schedule of the workflow completion for the tasks related to the topics of the electronic meeting; (Chan discloses recommendations in at least [0072-0073]; [0069] discloses a display screen.) and displaying, by the RPA agent, the modified recommended schedule. (Chan [0069] discloses a display screen.) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the meeting robot of Want with the system of digital delegates for meetings and conferences of Chan in order to access a teleconference and determine responses to points of interest in a meeting (Chan abstract) because the references are analogous since they both fall within Applicant's field of endeavor and are reasonably pertinent to the problem with which Applicant is concerned. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANCIS Z SANTIAGO-MERCED whose telephone number is (571)270-5562. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-4:30pm EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BRIAN EPSTEIN can be reached at 571-270-5389. 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. /FRANCIS Z. SANTIAGO MERCED/Examiner, Art Unit 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 2 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 3 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 4 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 5 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 6 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 7 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 8 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 9 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 10 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 11 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 12 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 13 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 14 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 15 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 16 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 17 Art Unit: 3625 Application/Control Number: 18/633,438 Page 18 Art Unit: 3625
Prosecution Insights