DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communication filed on 16 April 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application and have been considered below.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The lase element of the above claims recites ‘detecting the the value in the first column of the table’ (emphasis added). It appears that the second ‘the’ is redundant and needs to be removed
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 17 recites ‘wherein the set of selectable options for the trigger include a set of mutable features of the object, and wherein the feature of the object is a mutable feature selected from the set of mutable features’ (emphasis added). The applicant’s disclosure recites “At 704, the computing system populates, within the user interface, a set of selectable options for the trigger or a set of selectable options for the action. The set of selectable options for the trigger or the set of selectable options for the action are populated based on a property of the object in the digital environment. For example, the options for the trigger can include features of the object that are mutable as users of the content platform 310 interact with the object or related objects, giving the user the option to create a trigger that is satisfied when a change to a certain feature of the object is detected” (par. 0071). “Selecting a feature from the set of mutable features” is not recited anywhere in the specification. Examiner invites the applicant to point out to the pertinent section of the specification in case it was missed by the examiner. See factors set In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737, 8 USPQ2d 1400, 1404 (Fed. Cir. 1998). See also MPEP § 2164.01(a) and § 2164.04.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-13 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PEARL et al. (US20190265821A1) in view of KISHORE et al. (US20240223626A1).
As to claim 1, PEARL teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions recorded thereon, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one data processor of a system (see figs. 1-11, par. 0081, wherein as shown in the example of FIG. 8A, the administrator console automation view of the graphical user interface includes a create automation button 805. An administrator or authorized end-user can select button 805 to add or start a new automation (e.g., workflow automation); as taught by PEARL),
cause the system to: output for display, a user interface for generating an automation (see fig. 8B, par. 0081, wherein FIG. 8B illustrates the administrator console automation view of the graphical user interface for creation of a new automation once the automation button 805 is selected; as taught by PEARL),
associated with a table in a digital environment (see fig. 1, items 100 and 130, par. 0037, wherein the host server can include an action log, an event dispatcher, one or more processors, one or more databases, and one or more real time clients. Together these components are generally referred to herein as an “action log framework” (ALF). Components of the ALF may reside in the front-end systems, the back-end systems, or a combination thereof; as taught by PEARL),
wherein the user interface includes: a trigger control element to define a trigger for the automation, and an action control element to define an action to be performed in response to the trigger (see fig. 8B, par. 0081, wherein the example of FIG. 8B shows event fields 810, qualifier fields 812, and action fields 814; as taught by PEARL);
and wherein the table includes a plurality of columns (see fig. 1, items 100 and 130, par. 0037, wherein the host server can include an action log, an event dispatcher, one or more processors, one or more databases; as taught by PEARL);
populate, within the user interface, a set of selectable options for the trigger or a set of selectable options for the action (see fig. 8B, par. 0081, wherein an administrator or authorized user can select an event from the event fields (e.g., file uploaded) and a qualifier (e.g., in folder A). If the event occurs with the qualifier then the selected action occurs (e.g., assign a task to review the document to user #1); as taught by PEARL),
wherein the set of selectable options for the trigger include options that relate to an update to a value, and wherein the set of selectable options for the action include options that relate to modifying a value (see fig. 9B, par. 0084, wherein FIG. 9B illustrates a GUI including event fields 910, qualifier fields 912, and action fields 914. As shown in the examples of FIGS. 9B-9D, changing the selection of an event field 910 can also modify the qualifier and action fields. For example, if an administrator selects “UPLOAD” as shown in FIG. 9B, then the qualifier fields provides a check box input to select what the uploaded document should be searched for (e.g., social security number, credit card number, or other custom words that can be input). The action field 914 provides a checkbox input for the actions to take if the document uploaded contains the selected information; see also figs. 9C-10B, pars. 0085-0087; as taught by PEARL)
and execute the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger (see fig. 6, par. 0077, wherein in process 618, the user extracts user input from the multiple populated fields of the graphical user interface. Lastly, in process 618, the rules configuration engine generates an automation rule for execution in the collaborative cloud-base environment based on the extracted user input.; as taught by PEARL).
PEARL does not expressly teach in one or more columns of the plurality of columns; in one or more columns of the plurality of columns; store an automation that includes a selected trigger and a selected action from the populated sets of selectable options.
In similar field of endeavor, KISHORE teaches in one or more columns of the plurality of columns; in one or more columns of the plurality of columns; store an automation that includes a selected trigger and a selected action from the populated sets of selectable options (see figs. 4A-10, e.g. fig. 4C, par. 0099, wherein as shown in the view 400 c, upon selection of the particular external platform in the platform selection field 430, an integration registry 432 may be queried to identify or determine and list available integrations for the selected external platform. Alternatively, a selection of a trigger 434 or an action 436 may be used to generate a query to the integration registry 432 and identify or determine a list of available integrations. In some cases, multiple fields 432, 434, or 436 may be used to generate a query to the integration registry. The integration registry 432 may be a service executing on, or a database at, a server 448 executing an authorization service 450, platform services 452, a content store 456, and/or an application programming interface (API) gateway 454, and so on. By way of a non-limiting example, the server 448 may the collaboration platform server 112 described herein, and accordingly, the authorization service 450 may be similar to the authorization service 116, the platform services 452 may be similar to one or more of the content management service 120, the issue tracking service 122, the log service 126, the chat service 124, and/or the other services 118. The content store 456 may be a database storing contents, and/or objects related to the one or more external platforms; as taught by KISHORE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the PEARL apparatus to include the teachings of KISHORE in one or more columns of the plurality of columns; in one or more columns of the plurality of columns; store an automation that includes a selected trigger and a selected action from the populated sets of selectable options. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as it is advantageous for the user to keep a repository of trigger events and actions for reference and to keep a log of the collaboration (see also KISHORE, par. 0003).
As to claim 2, PEARL and KISHORE teach the limitations of claim 1. PEARL further teaches wherein the selected trigger is related to an update to a value in a first column of the plurality of columns of the table, and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: performing the selected action upon detecting the the value in the first column of the table satisfies the selected trigger (see fig. 9B, par. 0084, wherein FIG. 9B illustrates a GUI including event fields 910, qualifier fields 912, and action fields 914. As shown in the examples of FIGS. 9B-9D, changing the selection of an event field 910 can also modify the qualifier and action fields. For example, if an administrator selects “UPLOAD” as shown in FIG. 9B, then the qualifier fields provides a check box input to select what the uploaded document should be searched for (e.g., social security number, credit card number, or other custom words that can be input). The action field 914 provides a checkbox input for the actions to take if the document uploaded contains the selected information; see also figs. 9C-10B, pars. 0085-0087; as taught by PEARL).
As to claim 3, PEARL and KISHORE teach the limitations of claim 2. KISHORE further teaches wherein the selected action is an action to be performed on an object in the digital environment other than the table (see figs. 2A-4B, pars. 0056-0115, e.g. figs. 3A-3B, par. 0080, wherein a view 300a of a virtual whiteboard graphical user interface shown in FIG. 3A describes an aspect of the virtual whiteboard graphical user interface similar to described above using FIG. 2D with reference to a content management service. The action region 302 and 304, in the virtual canvas 328, each may be configured to perform a specific action when a graphical object, for example, a graphical object 306, 308, 310, or 312, is moved into the action region 302 or 304. For example, the action region 302 may be configured to create a page or a content item based on keywords identified from parsing text corresponding to one or more graphical objects moved into the action region 302, and the action region 304 may be configured to update a content item with feedback based on keywords identified parsing text corresponding to a graphical object moved into the action region 304; as taught by KISHORE).
As to claim 4, PEARL and KISHORE teach the limitations of claim 1. KISHORE further teaches wherein the selected trigger is associated with an object in the digital environment other than the table (see figs. 4A-4G, pars. 0089-0115, e.g. figs. 4A-4B, par. 0091, wherein the virtual canvas 418 may be configured to receive user input or object creation commands to create one or more graphical objects shown in FIG. 4A as 404, 406, 408. Objects 404 and 408 may correspond to user-generated objects created in response to a selection of a corresponding object primitive or object creation command. The object 408 may be a selectable graphical object that is linked to an external object or a target location. The object 406 may include content that has been extracted from the external object and/or may include embedded content of the external object. Further, a control panel 410 may also be displayed within the virtual canvas 418. The control panel 410 may display various controls or text formatting options in addition to an option 412 to configure a particular automation for the created automation region 402; as taught by KISHORE);
wherein the selected action comprises modifying a value in a second column of the plurality of columns of the table; and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises modifying the value in the second column (see figs. 2A-4B, pars. 0056-0115, e.g. figs. 3A-3B, par. 0080, wherein a view 300a of a virtual whiteboard graphical user interface shown in FIG. 3A describes an aspect of the virtual whiteboard graphical user interface similar to described above using FIG. 2D with reference to a content management service. The action region 302 and 304, in the virtual canvas 328, each may be configured to perform a specific action when a graphical object, for example, a graphical object 306, 308, 310, or 312, is moved into the action region 302 or 304. For example, the action region 302 may be configured to create a page or a content item based on keywords identified from parsing text corresponding to one or more graphical objects moved into the action region 302, and the action region 304 may be configured to update a content item with feedback based on keywords identified parsing text corresponding to a graphical object moved into the action region 304; see also fig. 4E, par. 0109; as taught by KISHORE).
As to claim 5, PEARL and KISHORE teach the limitations of claim 1. KISHORE further teaches wherein the selected trigger includes an update to a value in a first column of the plurality of columns of the table; wherein the selected action comprises modifying a value in a second column of the plurality of columns of the table; and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: detecting, in a first row of the plurality of rows, the update to the value in the first column; and modifying the value in the second column of the first row in response to the detection (see figs. 2A-4B, pars. 0056-0115, e.g. figs. 2A-2C, par. 0071, wherein the action region 202 may be configured to create a new issue based on keywords identified from parsing text of a graphical object moved into the action region 202, and the action region 204 may be configured to perform an issue modification on the issue tracking platform. The issue modification may be performed for an issue that is identified by performing a structured query using keywords identified by parsing text of a graphical object moved into the action region 204. By way of a non-limiting example, the issue modification may be setting a status of an issue to a closed/resolved state. Actions described herein as configured for one or more action regions are for example only, and an action region may be configured to perform any other action on the issue tracking platform; as taught by KISHORE).
As to claim 7, PEARL and KISHORE teach the limitations of claim 1. PEARL further teaches wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: deploying a listener on an event stream in the digital environment, the listener configured to detect an event that satisfies the selected trigger; and executing the selected action in response to the detection of the event by the listener (see fig. 5, par. 0060, wherein one embodiment of the host server 400 includes the event-based automation engine 420 which can monitor events such as, for example, ALF events, and utilize and/or otherwise automatically apply the user-defined rules generated by the rules configuration engine 410 to the events in the cloud-based collaboration environment; as taught by PEARL).
As to claim 8, PEARL and KISHORE teach the limitations of claim 1. PEARL further teaches wherein the table is displayed in a page of the digital environment rendered by an application at a client device (see figs. 10A-10B, par. 0087, wherein as shown in the example of FIG. 10A, selection of the content manger button or tab 716 causes the content manager view of a graphical user interface to be received and electronically displayed on the user's device. An administer can view the policies on each of the user's files by browsing the users top level folder. Similarly, as illustrated in FIG. 10B, the quarantine folder can show all of the files that are quarantined from all users and what policies the file triggered to get quarantines; as taught by PEARL),
and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: receiving, from the application, a notification indicating that an action within the application satisfied the selected trigger; and executing the selected action in response to the notification (see fig. 5, par. 0060, wherein one embodiment of the host server 400 includes the event-based automation engine 420 which can monitor events such as, for example, ALF events, and utilize and/or otherwise automatically apply the user-defined rules generated by the rules configuration engine 410 to the events in the cloud-based collaboration environment; as taught by PEARL).
As to claim 16, PEARL teaches the limitations of claim 15. KISHORE further teaches wherein the selected trigger is associated with a feature of the object, and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: performing the selected action upon detecting the feature of the object satisfies the selected trigger (see figs. 2A-4G, par. 0071, wherein the action region 202 may be configured to create a new issue based on keywords identified from parsing text of a graphical object moved into the action region 202, and the action region 204 may be configured to perform an issue modification on the issue tracking platform. The issue modification may be performed for an issue that is identified by performing a structured query using keywords identified by parsing text of a graphical object moved into the action region 204. By way of a non-limiting example, the issue modification may be setting a status of an issue to a closed/resolved state; as taught by KISHORE).
As to claim 17, PEARL teaches the limitations of claim 16. KISHORE further teaches wherein the set of selectable options for the trigger include a set of mutable features of the object, and wherein the feature of the object is a mutable feature selected from the set of mutable features (see figs. 2A-4G, par. 0071, wherein the action region 202 may be configured to create a new issue based on keywords identified from parsing text of a graphical object moved into the action region 202, and the action region 204 may be configured to perform an issue modification on the issue tracking platform. The issue modification may be performed for an issue that is identified by performing a structured query using keywords identified by parsing text of a graphical object moved into the action region 204. By way of a non-limiting example, the issue modification may be setting a status of an issue to a closed/resolved state; as taught by KISHORE).
As to claim 18, PEARL teaches the limitations of claim 15. KISHORE further teaches wherein the selected action is an action for performance on the object upon satisfaction of the selected trigger (see figs. 4A-4G, par. 0101, wherein upon successful authentication of the user of the client device with respected to the selected external platform, and based on the one or more integrations available to the user of the client device, the automation interface UI 426 may be dynamically updated to display additional fields such as a trigger field 434 and an action field 436. The trigger field 434 may list one or more triggers to cause a particular action selected from a list of actions listed in the action field 436. By way of a non-limiting example, if the selected external platform in the platform selection field 430 is an issue management system, the trigger field 434 may include a list of triggers, including but not limited to, “when dropped in an automation region,” “when a graphical object contains a ‘particular word’,” and so on, and the action field 436 may include a list of actions, including but not limited to, “create a new issue,” “assign the issue to ‘a particular assignee’,” “close the issue,” and so on; as taught by KISHORE).
Claims 9-13 amount to the system for executing instructions of the non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claims 1-5 respectively. Accordingly, claims 9-13 are rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claims 1-5 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claims 15 and 19 amount to the method for executing instructions of the non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claims 1 and 5 respectively. Accordingly, claims 15 and 19 are rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claims 1 and 5 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claims 6, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PEARL et al. (US20190265821A1) in view of KISHORE et al. (US20240223626A1) and further in view of UREN et al. (US20230351282A1).
As to claim 6, PEARL and KISHORE teach the limitations of claim 1. PEARL and KISHORE do not expressly teach wherein the table stores data associated with a plurality of tasks and a first column of the plurality of columns specifies a corresponding duration for each task, including: a first task having a first duration, and a second task having a second duration, at least part of the second duration being after an end of the first duration; wherein the table is linked to a timeline that displays a visual representation of the plurality of tasks, including a first indicator of the first duration and a second indicator of the second duration; wherein the selected trigger includes a modification to the first duration; and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: modifying the second duration in the table based on the modification to the first duration to preserve a dependency between the first duration and the second duration; and updating a display of the timeline to indicate the modified second duration.
In similar field of endeavor, UREN teaches wherein the table stores data associated with a plurality of tasks and a first column of the plurality of columns specifies a corresponding duration for each task, including: a first task having a first duration, and a second task having a second duration, at least part of the second duration being after an end of the first duration (see figs. 2-14, pars. 0079-0083, wherein The user interface 14 includes several buttons 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 62 that when selected may open an input window or menu where a user can input or change data. The input windows/menus may include the following: An add object button 62 which when selected opens an add task window 70 (see FIG. 4 ) where a user can input a task and its associated properties including task name, duration, start date, end date, resources, constraints, and more. A resource menu 84 (see FIG. 12 ) where a user can add one or more resources and their associated properties, including resource name, description, type (e.g. human, equipment, facilities), availability limit (e.g. by % usage, age or number count), and cost rates (e.g. fixed cost, per hour cost, or cost per use). A deliverable menu 88 where a user can input one or more deliverables and their associated properties, including deliverable name, description, color code and whether the deliverable is an inclusion or exclusion. A plan view menu 92 where a user can choose how the plan is viewed (e.g. fit to window, zoom level) and whether certain elements are on or off (e.g. plan verification, critical path, guidelines); as taught by UREN);
wherein the table is linked to a timeline that displays a visual representation of the plurality of tasks, including a first indicator of the first duration and a second indicator of the second duration; wherein the selected trigger includes a modification to the first duration (see fig. 2, par. 0078, wherein a user may change the data via the user interface 14 and/or the plan editor 20, which are shown in FIG. 2; as taught by UREN);
and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: modifying the second duration in the table based on the modification to the first duration to preserve a dependency between the first duration and the second duration; and updating a display of the timeline to indicate the modified second duration (see figs. 2-13, par. 0131, wherein a task can have a time constraint around a specific date, such as: start no earlier than, start no later than, end no later than, end no earlier than, start on date, and end on date. In this case, the plan editor automatically runs a calculation to determine if the task end date or start date agrees with the constraint. If the answer is no, the plan editor adds a visual constraint error indicator to the task. Alternatively, or in addition, the plan editor modifies the task end date and start date to agree with the constraint and moves the task to the new position in the timeline. For example, if a task has the time constraint of “start on Sept. 4”, the plan editor modifies the task start date to be September 4, calculates the new task end date based on task duration, and moves the task graphic in the timeline so the task graphic start position is on September 4. The update of the task start date and end date will have a cascade effect to cause other calculations to be run, including a determination if the change creates any time conflicts with dependent tasks; as taught by UREN).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified PEARL and KISHORE invention to include the teachings of UREN wherein the table stores data associated with a plurality of tasks and a first column of the plurality of columns specifies a corresponding duration for each task, including: a first task having a first duration, and a second task having a second duration, at least part of the second duration being after an end of the first duration; wherein the table is linked to a timeline that displays a visual representation of the plurality of tasks, including a first indicator of the first duration and a second indicator of the second duration; wherein the selected trigger includes a modification to the first duration; and wherein executing the automation based on satisfaction of the selected trigger comprises: modifying the second duration in the table based on the modification to the first duration to preserve a dependency between the first duration and the second duration; and updating a display of the timeline to indicate the modified second duration. Such a person would have been motivated to make this combination as
many project plans include errors that can catastrophically derail the timeline and costs of a project. Therefore, being able to configure duration of tasks and visually depicting the interdependencies is advantageous as it assists in preparing and optimizing a project plan that minimizes errors in the plan and optimizes the project plan with regard to the timeline, use of resources, and associated costs (see UREN, pars. 0003-0005).
Claim 14 amounts to the system for executing instructions of the non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 6. Accordingly, claims 14 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 6 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Claim 20 amounts to the method for executing instructions of the non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium of claim 6. Accordingly, claims 20 is rejected for substantially the same reasons as presented above for claim 6 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Publication Number
Filing Date
Title
US20160065627A1
2014-08-29
Configurable metadata-based automation and content classification architecture for cloud-based collaboration platforms
US20190079933A1
2018-11-08
Triggering actions in an information feed system
US20150081624A1
2013-09-13
Configurable event-based automation architecture for cloud-based collaboration platforms
US20050097471A1
2004-11-24
Integrated timeline and logically-related list view
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KOOROSH NEHCHIRI whose telephone number is (408)918-7643. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William L. Bashore can be reached on 571-272-4088. 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.
/KOOROSH NEHCHIRI/Examiner, Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights