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 .
This action is responsive to the Application filed on 05/02/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 9, and 15 are independent claims.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph [0034], an unnecessary plural is used (“For example, the functionality associated with elements 112, 114, 116, 118, 120 in other embodiments can be combined into a single elements, or separated across a larger number of elements.”. For clarity, correction to “into a single element” should be implemented.
In paragraph [0057], the orchestration system is labeled 330 (“…to route signals from the components interconnected with the orchestration system 330…”), wherein paragraph [0051], it as defined as 315, with the user context as 330 (“The orchestration system 315 may also interact with a user database 325 to perform a lookup using an identifier 320 of the user and to obtain a user context 330 associated with the user.”). The orchestration system 330 should be corrected to the orchestration system 315 as previously defined in the specification.
In paragraph [0069], there is a duplicate of the word “in” (“The automatically storing the session context information in the persistent session context storage may comprise storing the session context information in in one or more persistent slots of a conversation system.”). The duplicate should be removed for correction.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informality:
Claim 8 contains a duplicate of the word “in” (“The method of claim 1, wherein the automatically storing the session context information in the persistent session context storage comprises storing the session context information in in one or more persistent slots of a conversation system”). The duplicate should be removed for correction.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 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 of this title, 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.
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 are advised of the obligation under 37 C.F.R. § 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Carbune et al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2024/0127799, hereinafter Carbune) in view of Carson et al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2014/0365885, hereinafter Carson).
As to independent claim 1, Carbune teaches
A method, comprising: obtaining information characterizing at least one user interacting with a processor-based digital human instantiated in at least a portion of a first device; (Paragraph 4, “The user can invoke an automated assistant on a first device and the first device can process a request that is provided with the invocation (e.g., before the invocation and/or proceeding the invocation). Paragraph 32, “Each of the assistant input devices 106 and/or any other computing device(s) operating one or more of the cloud-based automated assistant components 119 may include one or more memories for storage of data and software applications, one or more processors for accessing data and executing applications, and other components that facilitate communication over a network.”)
performing the following steps, in response to a request to transfer the processor-based digital human to a different device: (Paragraph 4, “Some implementations disclosed herein relate to selecting a second device to process audio data to continue a conversation with a user that was initiated with an automated assistant executing on a first device”)
and reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in at least a portion of the different device with at least a portion of the stored session context information; (Paragraph 7, “In some implementations, the same automated assistant can be executing on multiple devices. For example, an automated assistant can be executing, in part, on a first device, second device, and on a cloud-based device such that the cloud-based device performs some or all of the processing of the audio data. In those instances, all of the devices may have access to the context of the conversation that was initiated with the first device and thus can be utilized in processing of subsequent requests.”)
wherein the method is performed by at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory. (Paragraph 32, “Each of the assistant input devices 106 and/or any other computing device(s) operating one or more of the cloud-based automated assistant components 119 may include one or more memories for storage of data and software applications, one or more processors for accessing data and executing applications, and other components that facilitate communication over a network.”)
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach automatically storing session context information in a persistent session context storage based at least in part on the obtained information.
Carson teaches automatically storing session context information in a persistent session context storage based at least in part on the obtained information (Paragraph 109, “Context persistence module 420 includes context history 352 and a first condition module 422. Context history 352 is a short term, or cache, memory that stores contextual information from one or more previous instances of the DA.” (DA is an abbreviation for digital assistant))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 2, Carbune as modified further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the request to transfer the processor-based digital human to the different device is initiated by one or more of the at least one user and the processor-based digital human. (Paragraph 23, “It thus should be understood that each user that engages with an automated assistant client 118 executing on one or more of the assistant input devices 106 may, in effect, engage with his or her own logical instance of an automated assistant (or a logical instance of automated assistant that is shared amongst a household or other group of users and/or shared amongst multiple automated assistant clients”).
As to dependent claim 3, Carbune as modified further teaches
The method of claim 1, wherein the first device provides an identifier of the at least one user to the different device (Paragraph 89, “In some implementations, the method further includes the steps of: determining a user identifier of the user; and providing the user identifier with the notification.”)
and wherein the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device comprises the different device sending a request to instantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device, (Paragraph 5, “ In response, the automated assistant executing on the smart speaker …can provide a notification to one or more other linked devices that are part of an ecosystem of linked devices that includes the smart speaker (e.g., a second smart speaker in another room, a smart television, a smartphone in another location). The notification can indicate that the user may be issuing a follow-up query that may be captured by a microphone of one of the other devices. Each of the other devices can then process sensor data from sensors of the corresponding device (i.e., each automated assistant processes the sensor data from the sensors of the device that is executing the automated assistant) to determine whether the user has moved and is now present near the device. …Once user presence near one of the other devices is determined, that device can provide an indication to the first device (i.e., the device that processed the first request) to indicate that it will handle subsequent follow-up requests.” The second device sends an indication to indicate that it will handle subsequent follow-up request, which serves as “a request to initiate the processor-based digital human”.)
wherein the request comprises the identifier of the at least one user. (Paragraph 99, “In some implementations, the first assistant device is further configured to: determine a user identifier of the user; and provide the user identifier to the second device, and the second assistant device is further configured to: determine, based on the user identifier and at least a portion of sensor data, whether the co-present user is the user; and provide the indication only if the co-present user is the user.”)
As to dependent claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach the method of claim 1, wherein the session context information is stored in the persistent session context storage with a session identifier used to reinstantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device with the at least the portion of the stored session context information.
Carson teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the session context information is stored in the persistent session context storage with a session identifier used to reinstantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device with the at least the portion of the stored session context information. (“Paragraph 108, “In some embodiments, context information from a previous instance (or session) of a DA user interface is used in intent inference by natural language processor 332 during a subsequent instance of the DA user interface.” The examiner interrpts the context information as being used to identify a given session, therefore it is utilized as a session identifier.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Carbune as modified teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, following the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device.. (Paragraph 7, “In some implementations, the same automated assistant can be executing on multiple devices. For example, an automated assistant can be executing, in part, on a first device,
second device, and on a cloud-based device such that the cloud-based device performs some or all of the processing of the audio data. In those instances, all of the devices may have access to the context of the conversation that was initiated with the first device and thus can be utilized in processing of subsequent requests.”)
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach responding to the at least one user using at least some of the stored session context information.
Carson teaches responding to the at least one user using at least some of the stored session context information. (See Paragraph 108, where Carson describes the digital human interaction and response to the user using the stored context information in detail).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 6, Carbune as modified further teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising authenticating the at least one user prior to the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device. (Paragraph 29, “ Additionally, or alternatively, in some implementations, one or more of the assistant input devices 106 may perform speaker recognition to recognize a user from their voice. For example, some instances of the automated assistant may be configured to match a voice to a user's profile, e.g., for purposes of providing/restricting access to various resources.”)
As to dependent claim 7, Carbune as modified further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device comprises providing a destination address for the processor-based digital human to the different device. (Paragraph 7, “For example, a first automated assistant, executing on a first device, can process the initial request, determine that a follow-up request is likely to occur, and send notifications to other linked devices to process sensor data to determine if the user has changed locations. If one of the devices provides a notification indicating presence of the user near that device, the first device can provide context for the prior request(s) such that the second device can resolve any contextual ambiguities in the follow-up request(s).” The notification from the second device serves as a destination address, providing information regarding where to resinstate the digital human.)
As to dependent claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated.
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach the method of claim 1, wherein the automatically storing the session context information in the persistent session context storage comprises storing the session context information in in one or more persistent slots of a conversation system..
Carson teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the automatically storing the session context information in the persistent session context storage comprises storing the session context information in in one or more persistent slots of a conversation system (Paragraph 111, “Conversation persistence module 430 includes conversation history 354 and a second condition module 432. Conversation history 354 is a short term, or cache, memory that stores conversation information including a transcript of a dialogue between the user and the DA from one or more previous instances of the DA.” The cache in this instance can be interpreted as storing one or more persistent slots of a conversation system, the persistent slots comprising of the transcript (dialogue) between the user and the DA).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to independent claim 9, Carbune teaches
An apparatus comprising: at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory; (See Claim 25)
the at least one processing device being configured to implement the following steps: obtaining information characterizing at least one user interacting with a processor-based digital human instantiated in at least a portion of a first device; (Paragraph 4, “The user can invoke an automated assistant on a first device and the first device can process a request that is provided with the invocation (e.g., before the invocation and/or proceeding the invocation). Paragraph 32, “Each of the assistant input devices 106 and/or any other computing device(s) operating one or more of the cloud-based automated assistant components 119 may include one or more memories for storage of data and software applications, one or more processors for accessing data and executing applications, and other components that facilitate communication over a network.”)
performing the following steps, in response to a request to transfer the processor-based digital human to a different device: (Paragraph 4, “Some implementations disclosed herein relate to selecting a second device to process audio data to continue a conversation with a user that was initiated with an automated assistant executing on a first device”)
and reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in at least a portion of the different device with at least a portion of the stored session context information; (Paragraph 7, “In some implementations, the same automated assistant can be executing on multiple devices. For example, an automated assistant can be executing, in part, on a first device, second device, and on a cloud-based device such that the cloud-based device performs some or all of the processing of the audio data. In those instances, all of the devices may have access to the context of the conversation that was initiated with the first device and thus can be utilized in processing of subsequent requests.”)
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach automatically storing session context information in a persistent session context storage based at least in part on the obtained information.
Carson teaches automatically storing session context information in a persistent session context storage based at least in part on the obtained information (Paragraph 109, “Context persistence module 420 includes context history 352 and a first condition module 422. Context history 352 is a short term, or cache, memory that stores contextual information from one or more previous instances of the DA.” (DA is an abbreviation for digital assistant))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 10, Carbune as modified further teaches
The apparatus of claim 9, wherein the first device provides an identifier of the at least one user to the different device (Paragraph 89, “In some implementations, the method further includes the steps of: determining a user identifier of the user; and providing the user identifier with the notification.”)
and wherein the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device comprises the different device sending a request to instantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device, (Paragraph 5, “ In response, the automated assistant executing on the smart speaker …can provide a notification to one or more other linked devices that are part of an ecosystem of linked devices that includes the smart speaker (e.g., a second smart speaker in another room, a smart television, a smartphone in another location). The notification can indicate that the user may be issuing a follow-up query that may be captured by a microphone of one of the other devices. Each of the other devices can then process sensor data from sensors of the corresponding device (i.e., each automated assistant processes the sensor data from the sensors of the device that is executing the automated assistant) to determine whether the user has moved and is now present near the device. …Once user presence near one of the other devices is determined, that device can provide an indication to the first device (i.e., the device that processed the first request) to indicate that it will handle subsequent follow-up requests.” The second device sends an indication to indicate that it will handle subsequent follow-up request, which serves as “a request to initiate the processor-based digital human”.)
wherein the request comprises the identifier of the at least one user. (Paragraph 99, “In some implementations, the first assistant device is further configured to: determine a user identifier of the user; and provide the user identifier to the second device, and the second assistant device is further configured to: determine, based on the user identifier and at least a portion of sensor data, whether the co-present user is the user; and provide the indication only if the co-present user is the user.”)
As to dependent claim 11, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated.
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the session context information is stored in the persistent session context storage with a session identifier used to reinstantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device with the at least the portion of the stored session context information..
Carson teaches the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the session context information is stored in the persistent session context storage with a session identifier used to reinstantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device with the at least the portion of the stored session context information.. (“Paragraph 108, “In some embodiments, context information from a previous instance (or session) of a DA user interface is used in intent inference by natural language processor 332 during a subsequent instance of the DA user interface.” The examiner interrupts the context information as being used to identify a given session, therefore it is utilized as a session identifier.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 12, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated.
Carbune as modified teaches the apparatus of claim 9, further comprising, following the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device, …(Paragraph 7, “In some implementations, the same automated assistant can be executing on multiple devices. For example, an automated assistant can be executing, in part, on a first device,
second device, and on a cloud-based device such that the cloud-based device performs some or all of the processing of the audio data. In those instances, all of the devices may have access to the context of the conversation that was initiated with the first device and thus can be utilized in processing of subsequent requests.”)
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach responding to the at least one user using at least some of the stored session context information.
Carson teaches responding to the at least one user using at least some of the stored session context information. (See Paragraph 108, where Carson describes the digital human interaction and response to the user using the stored context information in detail).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 13, Carbune as modified further teaches the apparatus of claim 9, further comprising authenticating the at least one user prior to the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device. (Paragraph 29, “ Additionally, or alternatively, in some implementations, one or more of the assistant input devices 106 may perform speaker recognition to recognize a user from their voice. For example, some instances of the automated assistant may be configured to match a voice to a user's profile, e.g., for purposes of providing/restricting access to various resources.”)
As to dependent claim 14, Carbune as modified further teaches the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device comprises providing a destination address for the processor-based digital human to the different device. (Paragraph 7, “For example, a first automated assistant, executing on a first device, can process the initial request, determine that a follow-up request is likely to occur, and send notifications to other linked devices to process sensor data to determine if the user has changed locations. If one of the devices provides a notification indicating presence of the user near that device, the first device can provide context for the prior request(s) such that the second device can resolve any contextual ambiguities in the follow-up request(s).” The notification from the second device serves as a destination address, providing information regarding where to reinstate the digital human.)
As to independent claim 15, Carbune teaches
A non-transitory processor-readable storage medium having stored therein program code of one or more software programs, (See Claim 25)
wherein the program code when executed by at least one processing device causes the at least one processing device to perform the following steps: (See Claim 25)
obtaining information characterizing at least one user interacting with a processor-based digital human instantiated in at least a portion of a first device; (Paragraph 4, “The user can invoke an automated assistant on a first device and the first device can process a request that is provided with the invocation (e.g., before the invocation and/or proceeding the invocation). Paragraph 32, “Each of the assistant input devices 106 and/or any other computing device(s) operating one or more of the cloud-based automated assistant components 119 may include one or more memories for storage of data and software applications, one or more processors for accessing data and executing applications, and other components that facilitate communication over a network.”)
performing the following steps, in response to a request to transfer the processor-based digital human to a different device: (Paragraph 4, “Some implementations disclosed herein relate to selecting a second device to process audio data to continue a conversation with a user that was initiated with an automated assistant executing on a first device”)
and reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in at least a portion of the different device with at least a portion of the stored session context information; (Paragraph 7, “In some implementations, the same automated assistant can be executing on multiple devices. For example, an automated assistant can be executing, in part, on a first device, second device, and on a cloud-based device such that the cloud-based device performs some or all of the processing of the audio data. In those instances, all of the devices may have access to the context of the conversation that was initiated with the first device and thus can be utilized in processing of subsequent requests.”)
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach automatically storing session context information in a persistent session context storage based at least in part on the obtained information.
Carson teaches automatically storing session context information in a persistent session context storage based at least in part on the obtained information (Paragraph 109, “Context persistence module 420 includes context history 352 and a first condition module 422. Context history 352 is a short term, or cache, memory that stores contextual information from one or more previous instances of the DA.” (DA is an abbreviation for digital assistant))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 16, Carbune as modified further teaches
The non-transitory processor-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the first device provides an identifier of the at least one user to the different device (Paragraph 89, “In some implementations, the method further includes the steps of: determining a user identifier of the user; and providing the user identifier with the notification.”)
and wherein the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device comprises the different device sending a request to instantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device, (Paragraph 5, “ In response, the automated assistant executing on the smart speaker …can provide a notification to one or more other linked devices that are part of an ecosystem of linked devices that includes the smart speaker (e.g., a second smart speaker in another room, a smart television, a smartphone in another location). The notification can indicate that the user may be issuing a follow-up query that may be captured by a microphone of one of the other devices. Each of the other devices can then process sensor data from sensors of the corresponding device (i.e., each automated assistant processes the sensor data from the sensors of the device that is executing the automated assistant) to determine whether the user has moved and is now present near the device. …Once user presence near one of the other devices is determined, that device can provide an indication to the first device (i.e., the device that processed the first request) to indicate that it will handle subsequent follow-up requests.” The second device sends an indication to indicate that it will handle subsequent follow-up request, which serves as “a request to initiate the processor-based digital human”.)
wherein the request comprises the identifier of the at least one user. ( Paragraph 99, “In some implementations, the first assistant device is further configured to: determine a user identifier of the user; and provide the user identifier to the second device, and the second assistant device is further configured to: determine, based on the user identifier and at least a portion of sensor data, whether the co-present user is the user; and provide the indication only if the co-present user is the user.”)
As to dependent claim 17, the rejection of claim 15 is incorporated.
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach the non-transitory processor-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the session context information is stored in the persistent session context storage with a session identifier used to reinstantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device with the at least the portion of the stored session context information.
Carson teaches the non-transitory processor-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the session context information is stored in the persistent session context storage with a session identifier used to reinstantiate the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device with the at least the portion of the stored session context information. (“Paragraph 108, “In some embodiments, context information from a previous instance (or session) of a DA user interface is used in intent inference by natural language processor 332 during a subsequent instance of the DA user interface.” The examiner interrupts the context information as being used to identify a given session, therefore it is utilized as a session identifier.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 18, the rejection of claim 15 is incorporated.
Carbune as modified teaches the non-transitory processor-readable storage medium of claim 15, further comprising, following the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device,… (Paragraph 7, “In some implementations, the same automated assistant can be executing on multiple devices. For example, an automated assistant can be executing, in part, on a first device, second device, and on a cloud-based device such that the cloud-based device performs some or all of the processing of the audio data. In those instances, all of the devices may have access to the context of the conversation that was initiated with the first device and thus can be utilized in processing of subsequent requests.”)
Carbune does not appear to expressly teach responding to the at least one user using at least some of the stored session context information.
Carson teaches responding to the at least one user using at least some of the stored session context information. (See Paragraph 108, where Carson describes the digital human interaction and response to the user using the stored context information in detail).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the processing continued conversations over multiple devices of Carbune to include the device, method, and graphical user interface for enabling conversation persistence across two or more instances of a digital assistant of Carson such that the digital human’s conversation context is seamlessly shared and reliable across multiple devices, allowing a continuous user experience.
As to dependent claim 19, Carbune as modified further teaches the non-transitory processor-readable storage medium of claim 15, further comprising authenticating the at least one user prior to the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device (Paragraph 29, “Additionally, or alternatively, in some implementations, one or more of the assistant input devices 106 may perform speaker recognition to recognize a user from their voice. For example, some instances of the automated assistant may be configured to match a voice to a user's profile, e.g., for purposes of providing/restricting access to various resources.”)
As to dependent claim 20, Carbune as modified further teaches the non-transitory processor-readable storage medium of claim 15, wherein the reinstantiating the processor-based digital human in the at least the portion of the different device comprises providing a destination address for the processor-based digital human to the different device. (Paragraph 7, “For example, a first automated assistant, executing on a first device, can process the initial request, determine that a follow-up request is likely to occur, and send notifications to other linked devices to process sensor data to determine if the user has changed locations. If one of the devices provides a notification indicating presence of the user near that device, the first device can provide context for the prior request(s) such that the second device can resolve any contextual ambiguities in the follow-up request(s).” The notification from the second device serves as a destination address, providing information regarding where to resinstate the digital human.)
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when
to this action. Lewis et al. (US 11727220 B2) teaches receiving one or more instances of free-form natural language input from a user during a human-to-computer dialog session between the user and an automated assistant; generating a first dialog context based thereon; receiving one or more additional instances of free-form natural language input from the user during the same human-to-computer dialog session or a different human-to-computer dialog session between the user and the automated assistant; generating a second dialog context based on the additional instances received; receiving a transition command from the user to return the automated assistant from the second dialog context to the first dialog context; and causing natural language output to be presented at the same computing device or a different computing device operated by the user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Misha D. Zatezalo whose telephone number is 571-272-0591. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8am to 5pm, Eastern Time.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alexey Shmatov can be reached on 571-270-3428. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/M.D.Z./Examiner, Art Unit 2123
/ALEXEY SHMATOV/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2123
