DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment filed 7/1/2026.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/1/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments shall be addressed in the order in which they were presented.
Applicant first argues on pages 6 and 7 that the “contents of interest” of VanBlon does not teach the identification of relationships required by claim 1. Furthermore, Applicant argues VanBlon does not disclose a semantic analysis as VanBlon breaks text into segments so that it fits on smaller screens.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0050], the processor teaches of identifying instructional content within content currently being accessed and identifying individual instructions within content subsections within the instructional content. As VanBlon later teaches in paragraph [0054], and corresponding Fig. 6A, upon separating the instructional content into content subsections 612-617, the order of the content subsections is maintained. This teaching of VanBlon clearly encompasses an “identification of relationship” between the content subsections, as the subsections have an order. Furthermore, as VanBlon shows in Fig. 3, steps 301 and 314, the user can traverse the order of content subsections via requesting a “next subsection”. These “relationships” offer particular benefit to a user in performing instructional content where an order of subsections performed bears particular weight, e.g., preparing food must occur before cooking said food.
Regarding Applicant’s argument of VanBlon not disclosing “semantic analysis”, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., semantic analysis) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The Examiner would like to further note, that while Applicant’s specification makes a plurality of references to “analysis fragments” and a reference to “semantic enrichment”, the Examiner can find no mention of “semantic analysis”.
Applicant next argues on page 7 that the audio presentation of VanBlon does not disclose Applicant’s “semantic enrichment” as no new semantic elements are added. The examiner again respectfully disagrees.
In trying to understand the term “semantic enrichment”, the Examiner looked to Applicant’s original disclosure for definition. The only references to “semantic enrichment” are discussed in Applicant’s specification in page 2, lines 4-10 and page 6, line 34 – page 7, line 5. None of these cited sections describe what Applicant’s intention as to a definition of “semantic enrichment” may be. Therefore, given a basic definition of the term “semantic” (relating to meaning in language), the examiner interprets the term as adding any content which “enhances” the language presented. As VanBlon teaches in paragraphs [0057] and p0086], displayed text may be presented verbally by the device, which the examiner interprets as “enriching” the language of the text, i.e., expanding possible output of said text.
Applicant next argues on page 8 that the guided mode and website of VanBlon are displayed on two different devices and therefore on different interactive interfaces.
The examiner again respectfully disagrees.
VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0049] that the instructional support mode, shown in Fig. 6B, may be activated via input by a user. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0050], in response to the activation, the processors analyzes the content presently being accessed through a web browser, etc. VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0052], and corresponding Fig. 6A, a webpage which may be accessed is presented. These teaching at least suggest that a user of VanBlon may view a webpage and subsequently activate an instructional support mode regarding said web page, wherein viewing said webpage is interpreted to encompass Applicant’s linear mode and VanBlon’s instructional support mode encompasses Applicant’s guided mode. VanBlon further directly teaches in paragraph [0072], corresponding to Fig. 4, that “when a browser is open on the device, at 408, the displayed content is reviewed” for instructional content, further supporting the Examiner’s interpretation.
Applicant next argues on page 10, with regard to claim 3, that VanBlon does not disclose “switching” between the two modes in a “two-way” fashion.
The examiner again respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., two-way switching) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
As currently worded, Applicant’s claim 3 currently requires allowing “a switching between linear mode and guided mode”. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0072], displayed content in a browser may be reviewed for instructional content before an instructional support mode is commenced. VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0049] of several possible methods of activating said instructional support mode. Any of the methods taught in paragraph [0049] may be interpreted as allowing the “switching” function of claim 3, where a currently displayed webpage (linear mode) is “switched” to an instructional support mode (guided mode).
Applicant finally argues on page 10 of the response, with regard to claim 7, that VanBlon’s method of adding a page is not the same as Applicant’s step of adding content to a page.
The examiner again respectfully disagrees.
Claim 7 reads as follows: “the interactive interface is configured to allow the user to add to a screen page displayed by the interactive interface the multimedia support or a support text, the multimedia support or the support text comprising support information intended to facilitate the execution of the plurality of operation steps relating to the series of instructions to be carried out”. Given the wording of claim 7, the Examiner interprets allowing a user to select instructional text to be added to an instructional support mode to encompass Applicant’s limitation. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0051], the user may designate a beginning and/or end of instructional content, which will then be analyzed and “added to” the instructional support screens.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 9-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VanBlon et al. (US 2018/0088969), hereinafter VanBlon, in view of Bickmore et al. (US 6,857,102), hereinafter Bickmore.
As per claim 1, VanBlon teaches the following:
a computer-implemented method for controlling a user terminal, (see abstract), the method comprising the following steps of:
loading a target electronic document comprising a target text in natural language, the target text comprising syntactic markers. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0050], content is presently being accessed through a web browser, social media tool, or other application;
dividing the target text into a plurality of analysis fragments, two adjacent analysis fragments being separated by a syntactic marker. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0006], a set of content subsections are identified. VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0051] that beginning and end of subsections may be identified based on format of information presented, such as by identifying numbered statements, bullet items, separate paragraphs, etc. (syntactic markers);
extracting terms of interest from at least one analysis fragment of the plurality of analysis fragments, the terms of interest comprising identified concepts expressed in the target text as well as identified relationships between said the identified concepts. As VanBlon further teaches in paragraph [0051] that the parsing may search for keywords or phrases in order to identify individual instructions within the content. VanBlon further gives the example of Fig. 6A, and corresponding paragraph [0053], where different sections of content are identified and relationships between said sections, e.g., background, ingredients, directions, etc.;
semantic enriching the target text on the basis of the terms of interest extracted and the division of the target text into analysis fragments. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0056], a target subsection may be presented in various ways, including audibly speaking the content, which is interpreted as semantically enriching the text based upon the target subsection, i.e., the terms of interest and division;
constructing a model understandable by computer based on the division of the target text into the plurality of analysis fragments, the syntactic markers, the terms of interest and the semantic enrichment of the target text, the model comprising a plurality of nodes representative of a plurality of operation steps relating to a series of instructions to be carried out and attributes relating at each step of the plurality of operation steps, as well as at least one link between two steps. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0054], after analysis, each individual content subsection is separated and recorded as a separate content subsection, i.e. a model;
generating an interactive interface from the obtained model. As VanBlon shows in Fig. 3, step 308, a content subsection is presented. As a user may request options in steps 310 and 312, this is interpreted as the interface being interactive;
the generated interactive interface comprising the following using modes:
a linear mode, in which the interactive interface renders the target text comprised in the target electronic document in natural language. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0049], a particular webpage may be displayed prior to entering an “instruction mode”, where this initial display is interpreted as encompassing a “linear mode”;
a guided mode, in which the interactive interface presents, for a determined step among the plurality of operation steps, at least one screen page presenting first interface elements corresponding to the at least one attribute of the step, at least one extract of the target text, As VanBlon shows in Figs. 3, 6B, and 6C, a guided mode is created which provides a navigable interface allowing a user to step through instructional content, one step at a time. VanBlon further shows in Fig. 3, step 310, and Fig. 6B, 632, that a user may request to be presented a next instructional step.
Furthermore, VanBlon does not explicitly teach of a control link between two steps. In a similar field of endeavor, Bickmore teaches of a method of modifying displayed content based upon transforming an original document (see abstract). Bickmore further teaches the following:
at least one second control interface element corresponding to a link to at least one another other step, the at least one second control interface element being configured to allow passage to a screen page corresponding to said the at least one other step following an activation of the at least one second control interface element by the user. As Bickmore teaches in column 8, lines 53-65, “next” and “previous” navigation links may be added to navigate between sequential pages.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the instructional step navigation of VanBlon with the navigational links of Bickmore. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because VanBlon clearly shows a desire for such options in Fig. 3, 310, and the links of Bickmore would benefit a user that may not be capable of speaking such instructions.
Regarding claim 2, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. However, VanBlon does not explicitly teach of adding syntactic markers. Bickmore teaches the following:
a step of introducing into the target text additional syntactic markers in addition to the syntactic markers comprised in the target text. As Bickmore teaches in column 8, lines 50-52, a secondary partitioning may be performed that partitions text blocks on paragraph or sentence boundaries. As Bickmore teaches of partitioning out a section and further partitioning that section into further sub-sections, this second partitioning is interpreted as “introducing” additional syntactic marker, where these markers may not have been originally intended to separate text.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the parsing of VanBlon with the secondary parsing of Bickmore. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because as Bickmore teaches in column 8, lines 41-65, such secondary parsing benefits users where an original parsing may not fit on a single display.
Regarding claim 3, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to allow a switching between linear mode and guided mode. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0049], a user may activate the instruction mode. Therefore, an initial web page is presented (linear mode) before “switching to” the instructional mode (guided mode).
Regarding claim 4, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. However, as described above, VanBlon does not explicitly teach of a control link between two steps. Bickmore teaches the following:
the interactive interface comprises at least one second control interface element configured to allow, if the interactive interface presents a screen page corresponding to a current step, to move to a screen page corresponding to a next step or a previous step in relation to the current step. As Bickmore teaches in column 8, lines 53-65, “next” and “previous” navigation links may be added to navigate between sequential pages.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the instructional step navigation of VanBlon with the navigational links of Bickmore. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because VanBlon clearly shows a desire for such options in Fig. 3, 310, and the links of Bickmore would benefit a user that may not be capable of speaking such instructions.
Regarding claim 5, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to allow, in guided mode and when the interactive interface presents a screen page corresponding to a current step, a communication of an alert message or a text part of the target text relating to a current step or to a step comprised in the plurality of operation steps other than the current step. As VanBlon shows in Fig. 6B, 636, text of a current step is presented.
Regarding claim 6, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured, in guided mode, to present, if the interactive interface displays the screen page corresponding to the a current step, a multimedia support relating to the current step. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0056], a subsection may include a video clip
Regarding claim 7, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 6 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to allow the user to add to a screen page displayed by the interactive interface the multimedia support or a support, the multimedia support or the support text comprising support information intended to facilitate the execution of the plurality of operation steps relating to the series of instructions to be carried out. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0051], a user may designate the instructions. Therefore, the user may “add a page” based upon where they designate a beginning and end of instructions.
Regarding claim 9, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to retain the target text comprised in the target electronic document and to present the target text in natural language in linear mode and in a progressive and guided manner in guided mode. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0038], memory 206 stores a list of instructional resources representing resource location that provide instructional content. VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0040] that application content and webpages accessed by the device are stored. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0054], after analysis, each individual content subsection is separated and recorded as a separate content subsection
Regarding claim 10, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the user can select in the interactive interface, in linear mode, a plurality of operation steps relating to a series of instructions to be carried out, the plurality of operation steps relating to a series of instructions to be carried out corresponding to analysis fragments of the plurality of analysis fragments, and the interactive interface displays, on the a basis of the selection made by the user, attributes relating to each step of the plurality of operation steps selected by the user, the attributes corresponding to the extracted terms of interest. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0051], a user may select a beginning and ending of instructional content, where keywords (terms of interest) may then be utilized to identify subsections.
Regarding claim 11, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
a term of interest extracted from an analysis fragment of the plurality of analysis fragments designates a verb which refers to an action to be carried out, or a tool used when carrying out the action, or a product used when carrying out the action. VanBlon teaches of several examples of keywords/phrases in paragraph [0051], such as “preheat the oven”, which includes a verb of the action to be carried out and tool used.
Regarding claim 12, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the target electronic document designates a maintenance notice for a device, a system or a given installation and the target text designates a series of instructions to be carried out for the maintenance notice of the device, the system or the installation. VanBlon gives examples of instructional content which may be presented in paragraph [0048], which includes “do-it-yourself home repair” and “automotive repair”, which may be interpreted as maintenance for a device.
Regarding claim 13, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the target electronic document designates a user manual for a device, a system or a given installation and the target text designates a series of instructions to be carried out to handle or operate the device, the system or the installation. VanBlon gives examples of instructional content which may be presented in paragraph [0048], which includes “do-it-yourself home repair” and “automotive repair”, which may be interpreted as maintenance for a device. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0049] that the instructional content may be that of a webpage, the examiner finds that the webpage may be that of a user manual.
Regarding claim 14, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 2 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is 14. configured to allow a switching between linear mode and guided mode. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0049], a user may activate the instruction mode. Therefore, an initial web page is presented (linear mode) before “switching to” the instructional mode (guided mode).
Regarding claim 15, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 14 as described above. However, as described above, VanBlon does not explicitly teach of a control link between two steps. Bickmore teaches the following:
the interactive interface comprises at least one second control interface element configured to allow, if the interactive interface presents a screen page corresponding to a current step, to move to a screen page corresponding to a next step or a previous step in relation to the current step. As Bickmore teaches in column 8, lines 53-65, “next” and “previous” navigation links may be added to navigate between sequential pages.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the instructional step navigation of VanBlon with the navigational links of Bickmore. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because VanBlon clearly shows a desire for such options in Fig. 3, 310, and the links of Bickmore would benefit a user that may not be capable of speaking such instructions.
Regarding claim 16, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 15 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to allow, in guided mode and when the interactive interface presents a screen page corresponding to a current step, a communication of an alert message or a text part of the target text relating to a current step or to a step comprised in the plurality of operation steps other than the current step. As VanBlon shows in Fig. 6B, 636, text of a current step is presented.
Regarding claim 17, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 16 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured, in guided mode, to present, if the interactive interface displays the screen page corresponding to a current step, a multimedia support relating to the current step. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0056], a subsection may include a video clip
Regarding claim 18, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 17 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to allow the user to add to a screen page displayed by the interactive interface the multimedia support or a support, the multimedia support or the support text comprising support information intended to facilitate the execution of the plurality of operation steps relating to the series of instructions to be carried out. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0051], a user may designate the instructions. Therefore, the user may “add a page” based upon where they designate a beginning and end of instructions.
Claim(s) 8, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VanBlon in view of Bickmore as applied to claims 1, 2, and 14-18 above, and further in view of Cassar (US 2012/0084681).
Regarding claim 8, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 1 as described above. However, VanBlon does not explicitly teach of “memorizing” a current step screen. Cassar teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to memorize the screen page corresponding to a current step, so that, if the interactive interface is stopped then restarted, the interactive interface presents, as soon as it is restarted, the screen page
corresponding to the step which was the current step before stopping the interactive interface. As Cassar teaches in paragraph [0188], and corresponding Fig. 12, in step 1228 a current view state of an application is saved when an input to close the application is received. Subsequently, when the application is relaunched in step 1236, the saved view is displayed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the current step view of VanBlon with the view saving of Cassar. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because saving view states provided the well known benefit of allowing a user to continue a process from where they left off, when the user is unable to complete an entire process during a specific time.
Regarding claim 19, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 18 as described above. However, VanBlon does not explicitly teach of “memorizing” a current step screen. Cassar teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to memorize the screen page corresponding to a current step, so that, if the interactive interface is stopped then restarted, the interactive interface presents, as soon as it is restarted, the screen page
corresponding to the step which was the current step before stopping the interactive interface. As Cassar teaches in paragraph [0188], and corresponding Fig. 12, in step 1228 a current view state of an application is saved when an input to close the application is received. Subsequently, when the application is relaunched in step 1236, the saved view is displayed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have modified the current step view of VanBlon with the view saving of Cassar. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to have made such modification because saving view states provided the well known benefit of allowing a user to continue a process from where they left off, when the user is unable to complete an entire process during a specific time.
Regarding claim 20, modified VanBlon teaches the method of claim 19 as described above. VanBlon further teaches the following:
the interactive interface is configured to retain the target text comprised in the target electronic document and to present the target text in natural language in linear mode and in a progressive and guided manner in guided mode. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0038], memory 206 stores a list of instructional resources representing resource location that provide instructional content. VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0040] that application content and webpages accessed by the device are stored. As VanBlon teaches in paragraph [0054], after analysis, each individual content subsection is separated and recorded as a separate content subsection
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
***Rouse et al. (US 2003/0011629), teaches presentation of instructional content including corresponding video media.
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 GREGORY A DISTEFANO whose telephone number is (571)270-1644. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9 am - 5 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, William Bashore can be reached at 5712424088. 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.
/GREGORY A. DISTEFANO/
Examiner
Art Unit 2174
/WILLIAM L BASHORE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2174
Prosecution Insights