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
Claims 1-17 are pending in this application and have been examined in response to application filed on 05/15/2024.
This application is a 371 of PCT/US22/48894 11/03/2022
This application has PRO 63/280,273 11/17/2021
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-3, 5-6 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) in view of Glover (US 10,783,326 B2).
As to INDEPENDENT claim 1, AAPA discloses a system for editing a document, comprising: at least one processor configured with instructions to perform digital functions including to: input digital data representing a document to be edited ([0030]; a user pulls up a digital document to be edited);
display an image of the document to be edited on a screen (fig.2, [0030]; a digital representation of the document to be edited is displayed);
display on the screen changes made by a user to the document to be edited (fig.2, “2A”; document is marked up); digitally track the changes made by the user to the document to be edited ([0030]; changes are tracked). AAPA does not expressly disclose …to create a virtual document; and using the virtual document, automatically digitally render a separate document in a selected format representing the changes made by the user to the document to be edited.
In the same field of endeavor, Glover discloses …to create a virtual document; and using the virtual document, automatically digitally render a separate document in a selected format representing the changes made by the user to the document to be edited.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of AAPA and Glover before him prior to the effective filling date, to modify the document editing interface taught by AAPA to include a summarized editing tracker taught by Glover with the motivation being to track and apply multiple document edits with ease.
As to claim 2, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the automatically rendered separate document is in a format selected from among an amendment, a table, a letter, or a contract (Glover, col.8, l.20-22; the amended/edited document is saved as a child document).
As to claim 3, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the automatically rendered separate document comprises a finalized version ready for execution (Glover, col.8, l.12-14; a final version is saved).
As to claim 5, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the functions performed by the at least one processor further includes a function to export the document to be edited showing the changes as made by the user to the document to be edited (AAPA, [0030]; redlined document is distributed for others to review).
As to claim 6, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the changes made by the user to the document to be edited comprise the insertion, revision, or deletion of data in the document to be edited (Glover, col.10, l.1-2; portions of the document can be inserted or deleted).
As to claim 11, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the function to automatically render the separate document comprises insertion of information from a selected marker into the separate document (Glover, fig.6, col.7, l.40-56, col.8, l.10-14; the user selects checkboxes to insert information into the new document).
As to INDEPENDENT claim 12 is a method variation of claim 1, therefore claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Claim 13 is a method variation of claim 2, therefore claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 2 above.
Claim 14 is a method variation of claim 3, therefore claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 3 above.
Claim 15 is a method variation of claim 5, therefore claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 5 above.
Claim 16 is a method variation of claim 6, therefore claim 16 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA-Glover in view of Burckart et al. (US 2015/0120685 A1).
As to claim 4, the prior art as combined does not expressly disclose wherein the functions performed by the at least one processor further include a function to automatically designate or permit selective designation of one or more sections of the document to be edited prior to the automatic rendering of the separate document.
In the same field of endeavor, Burckart discloses a function to automatically designate or permit selective designation of one or more sections of the document to be edited prior to the automatic rendering of the separate document ([0032]; a designation may be selectively assigned).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of AAPA-Glover and Burckart before him prior to the effective filling date, to modify the document editing interface taught by AAPA-Glover to include selective designation taught by Burckart with the motivation being to assign version control in an intuitive manner ([0003], [0004]).
Claims 7-10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA-Glover in view of Cochran et al. (US 11,488,232 B2).
As to claim 7, the prior art as combined does not expressly disclose wherein the changes made to the document to be edited comprise insertion of data selected by the user from a digital playbook.
In the same field of endeavor, Cochran discloses wherein the changes made to the document to be edited comprise insertion of data selected by the user from a digital playbook (col.12, l.58-62; predefined rules are applied to the document for enriching/correcting information in the document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of AAPA-Glover and Cochran before him prior to the effective filling date, to modify the document editing interface taught by AAPA-Glover to include a rules engine taught by Cochran with the motivation being to automate document reviewing process.
As to claim 8, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the automatically rendered separate document comprises the digital playbook data inserted by the user to the document to be edited (Cochran, col.12, l.58-62; predefined rules are applied to the document for enriching/correcting information in the document).
As to claim 9, the prior art as combined does not expressly disclose wherein the functions performed by the at least one processor further include a function to automatically analyze the document to be edited using a digital playbook.
In the same field of endeavor, Cochran discloses wherein the functions performed by the at least one processor further include a function to automatically analyze the document to be edited using a digital playbook (col.12, l.58-62; predefined rules are applied to the document for enriching/correcting information in the document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of AAPA-Glover and Cochran before him prior to the effective filling date, to modify the document editing interface taught by AAPA-Glover to include a rules engine taught by Cochran with the motivation being to automate document reviewing process.
As to claim 10, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the changes made to the document to be edited comprise insertion of data selected by the user based on the automatic analysis using the playbook (Cochran, col.12, l.58-62; predefined rules are applied to the document for enriching/correcting information in the document), and the automatically rendered separate document comprises the data inserted to the document to be edited by the user (Glover, col.8, l.20-22; the amended/edited document is saved as a child document).
Claim 17 is a method variation of claim 7, therefore claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 7 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAOSHIAN SHIH whose telephone number is (571)270-1257. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, FRED EHICHIOYA can be reached at (571) 272-4034. 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.
/HAOSHIAN SHIH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179