Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to Amendment filed 11/26/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application. Claims 1, 8, and 15 are independent claims. In Amendment, claims 1-14 are withdrawn from consideration due to previous restriction and claims 15, 16, and 18 are amended. This Office Action is made final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rogynskyy et al. (U.S. 2019/0362249 A1).
Re claim 15, Rogynskyy et al. disclose in Figures 1-31 a computing system (e.g. abstract and Figures 30-31) comprising:
one or more processors;
and one or more memory components, coupled with the one or more processors, having instructions stored thereon, which, when executed by the one or more processors (e.g. Figure 31 and its description in the reference), cause the computing system to:
obtain a training dataset comprising message delivery data and message response data (e.g. paragraphs [0724-0725] where it collects all the dataset of messages including delivery/transmit data and response/receive data);
train a collaborative-based machine learning model using the training dataset to generate a trained collective-based machine learning model that generates first time-zone scores indicating probabilities for a set of time zones corresponding with a message recipient (e.g. paragraphs [0003, 0013, 0191, 0216-0218, 0704] discloses training a ML model to generate time zone based on the delivered/sent messages/activities of the communication and paragraphs [0067, 0086] discloses the messages are delivered in batch to a group of recipients) based on at least a proportion of message of a set of electronic messages sent to recipients of a group of recipients associated with the corresponding time zone (e.g. abstract, Figures 28-30 and paragraphs [0488 and 0690-0693] wherein discloses the confidence score for the time-zone information based on the activities of multiple recipients); and
train an independent-based machine learning model using the training dataset to generate a trained independent-based machine learning model that generates second time-zone scores for the set of time zones based on the message delivery data and the message response data associated with a response, by the message recipient, to at least one received electronic message (e.g. paragraphs [0003, 0014, 0021, and 0409-0410] discloses training a ML model to generate time zone based on the response/received messages/activities of the communication and paragraphs [0067, 0086] discloses the messages are received from the group of recipients).
Re claim 16, Rogynskyy et al. disclose in Figures 1-31 the computing system is further caused to train a prediction machine learning model to generate third time-zone scores for the set of time zones using the output from the trained collaborative-based machine learning model and the trained independent-based machine learning model, the third time-zone scores indicating probabilities that a corresponding time zone corresponds with the message recipient (e.g. paragraphs [0111 and 0429]).
Re claim 17, Rogynskyy et al. disclose in Figures 1-31 the output from the collaborative-based machine learning model and the independent-based machine learning model is normalized before being used to train the prediction machine learning model (e.g. paragraphs [0077, 0272 and 0286-0287]).
Re claim 18, Rogynskyy et al. disclose in Figures 1-31 the trained collaborative-based machine learning model, the trained independent-based machine learning model, and the trained prediction machine learning model are used to predict a time zone for an individual previously associated with an unknown time zone (e.g. paragraphs [0306 and 0410-0411]).
Re claim 19, Rogynskyy et al. disclose in Figures 1-31 providing the time zone for inclusion in a profile associated with the individual previous associated with the unknown time zone (e.g. paragraphs [0081 and 0411-0412]).
Re claim 20, Rogynskyy et al. disclose in Figures 1-31 using the time zone in scheduling a subsequent message delivery to the individual previously associated with the unknown time zone (e.g. paragraphs [0009 and 0134]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues in pages 7-8 for claim 15 that the cited reference does not disclose or describe very different from the amended/added limitations in the claim.
The examiner respectfully submits that the newly added limitations can be clearly seen in the rejection above, in particular Figures 28-30 and paragraphs [0488 and 0690-0693]. In these citations, they disclose a confident score is provided/computed for every piece of information to indicate how accurate the information would be. In this case, the information is the time-zone based on activities of multiple recipients/participants of communication.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUOC H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 am -3:30 pm.
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, Christopher Parry can be reached at 571-272-8328. 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.
/PHUOC H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2451