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 action is issued in response to Application filed July 19, 2024.
Claims 1-18 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 7/30/2024 and 2/23/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an Abstract Idea without significantly more.
Claims 1-8 and 11 are method claims and directed to the process category of patentable subject matter.
Claim 9 is an apparatus claim and directed to the machine category of patentable subject matter.
Claims 10 and 12-18 are device claims and directed to the machine category of patentable subject matter.
Although claims 1-18 fall under at least one of the four statutory categories, it should be determined whether the claims recite a judicial exception.
Regarding Step 2A-1, Claims 1-18 recite a judicial exception. Exemplary independent claims 1, 9, and 10 recite the limitations (struck-through limitations have been identified as additional elements and will be discussed in later sections):
receiving search information;
acquiring an artificial intelligence answer result corresponding to the search information, in response to a search type corresponding to the search information belonging to a target search type, wherein the target search type comprises a creation type and a target first search type indicating that search results corresponding to the search information fail to satisfy a search demand, the target-first search type comprises: a first type that a satisfaction degree of a corresponding-first-rank search result in the search results to the search demand does not meet a first requirement, or a second type that a satisfaction degree of any corresponding-search result in the search results to the search demand does not meet a second requirement, wherein the first requirement is higher than the second requirement; and
displaying the artificial intelligence answer result
With regard to the “receiving” limitation, a human may mentally observe and acquire information associated with search/question. This claim limitation has been identified as a recitation of a mental process.
With regard to the “acquiring” limitation, a human may mentally think and retrieve an answer or result of a search. This claim limitation has been identified as a recitation of a mental process.
With regard to the “displaying” limitation, a human may mentally or with pen/paper envision or write down the answer to the search. This claim limitation has been identified as a recitation of a mental process.
The examiner notes that under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III), the courts consider a mental process (thinking) that “can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper” to be an abstract idea. The limitations of “receiving”, “acquiring”, and “displaying”; fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas because this recites a mentally performable process of searching, retrieving, and displaying information. CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As the Federal Circuit explained, “methods which can be performed mentally, or which are the equivalent of human mental work, are unpatentable abstract ideas the ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that are open to all”. Specifically, the limitations as discussed above, as claimed, is a process that covers performance of the limitations in the mind, or with pen and paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components (i.e., processor, memory, device, etc.) because a user can mentally, or with pen and paper, search and display required information. See Digitech (organizing and manipulating information through mathematical correlations), Electric Power Group (collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim(s) includes additional elements which fall within the mental processing of information; in particular, the limitations of an artificial intelligence answer result and a preset display position on a search result page. The claims only recite additional elements (i.e., processor, memory, device, etc.) that are recited at a high-level of generality (e.g., as a generic computer or as a generic processor performing a generic computer function), such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. See 2106.05(d) (II). Accordingly, the additional element(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims as a whole do not appear to integrate the mental process into a practical application and is thus directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For example, the claims recite additional elements of joinable columns from tables; and a value level feature, a column level feature, and a table level feature. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component, or are merely drawn to insignificant extra-solution activity. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component or insignificant extra-solution is not significantly more than the judicial exception.
The dependent claims, 2-8 and 11-18, depend on a rejected parent claim and do not cure its deficiencies. Similar to the above discussion, each of the dependent claims are drawn to an abstract idea within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The claims are drawn to subject matter that covers performance of the claimed limitations in the mind, or with pen and paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components as discussed above. The claims are not integrated into a practical application. The claims only recite additional elements that is/are recited at a high-level of generality (e.g., as a generic computer or as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component or are merely drawn to insignificant extra-solution activity.
The claim elements considered individually or in combination do not result in a new or improved method for displaying search results.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LaRhette (U.S. Patent Application No. 2024/0281472) in view of Zhu (U.S. Patent Application No. 2024/0045898).
Regarding Claim 1, LaRhette discloses a search result display method, comprising:
receiving search information (Fig.8; par [0113], LaRhette – a machine learning model fine-tuning system, receives a search query from a user via a browser-based interface… Fig.10; par [0125] - user interface shows a user's browser including a user input box to receive input (e.g., a user's query) to be answered by the machine learning model fine-tuning system);
acquiring an artificial intelligence answer result corresponding to the search information (par [0113-0115], LaRhette – the machine learning model accesses a pre-trained LLM model designed to respond to the search query by performing a plurality of iterations to generate a task-specific generative model; wherein the generative model generates a search result… par [0125] - user interface shows a user's browser including a user input box to receive input (e.g., a user's query) to be answered by the machine learning model fine-tuning system; for example, the system can perform a task and provide generative AI summarization output using fine-tuned models), in response to a search type corresponding to the search information belonging to a target search type, wherein the target search type comprises a creation type and a first search type indicating that search results corresponding to the search information fail to satisfy a search demand, the first search type comprises: a first type that a satisfaction degree of a first-rank search result in the search results to the search demand does not meet a first requirement, or a second type that a satisfaction degree of any search result in the search results to the search demand does not meet a second requirement, wherein the first requirement is higher than the second requirement (par [0023], LaRhette - using an interactive browser-based interface combined with generative artificial intelligence to generate an answer to a user's query or set of queries utilizing large language models (LLMs) that have been fine-tuned into task-specific models optimized for different types of content… par [0091] - filtering stage that is responsible for the removal of any irrelevant or problematic results from the set of retrieved documents; thus ensuring that the output is free from content that does not meet the system's quality standards or relevance criteria… par [0117-0118], LaRhette… par [0233-0239], LaRhette); and
displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in a display on a
search result page (Fig.11; par [0128], LaRhette – the user interface includes AI answers and discovery through visual search stories… par [0145], LaRhette - a user device generates a proposed search result based on the initial search query and a user device displays, by the browser-based search interface, the proposed search result to the user).
While LaRhette teaches displaying the AI result in a display; however, LaRhette is not as explicitly detailed with respect to the result being displayed in a preset/certain position.
On the other hand, Zhu discloses the result being displayed in a preset/certain position (Figs. 2 & 5; par [0059], [0067], Zhu – a search result page is displayed and shows multiple regions (i.e., upper, central, and lower) of search results corresponding to the input search query that correlate to some preset indicators… par [0072-0073], Zhu - the preset direction is a preset display arrangement direction of the search result cards used to display the target search results related to search intentions… also par [0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Zhu’s search result display details into the LaRhette system. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine in order to provide a search result display method which may reduce a difficulty for a user to acquire search results desired thereby and improve efficiency of the user in consuming the search results.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of LaRhette in view of Zhu, disclose the search result display method according to claim 1, wherein the search type corresponding to the search information belongs to the creation type, and the artificial intelligence answer result corresponding to the search information comprises a plurality of answer results (par [0233-0237], LaRhette… par [0126-0128], LaRhette – AI searching generates most relevant answers/results); the displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in a preset display position on a search result page, comprises: displaying one of the plurality of answer results in the preset display position, and displaying a next answer result among the plurality of answer results in response to an answer result switch operation (par [0073-0075], Zhu - different search result cards correspond to different display regions on the search result page; wherein the system may switch between displaying different search result cards so that the target search results are presented more flexibly).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of LaRhette in view of Zhu, disclose the search result display method according to claim 2, wherein the displaying one of the plurality of answer results in the preset display position, and displaying a next answer result among the plurality of answer results in response to an answer result switch operation, comprises:
displaying an artificial intelligence card in the preset display position, wherein one of the plurality of answer results is displayed in the artificial intelligence card; and switching the answer result in the artificial intelligence card to the next answer result among the plurality of answer results in response to the answer result switch operation (par [0073-0075], Zhu - different search result cards correspond to different display regions on the search result page; wherein the system may switch between displaying different search result cards so that the target search results are presented more flexibly… LaRhette discloses the AI implemented aspect); or,
displaying a first artificial intelligence card in the preset display position, wherein one of the plurality of answer results is displayed in the first artificial intelligence card; switching the first artificial intelligence card to a next artificial intelligence card in response to the answer result switch operation, wherein the next answer result among the plurality of answer results is displayed in the next artificial intelligence card.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of LaRhette in view of Zhu, disclose the search result display method according to claim 1, wherein the search type corresponding to the search information belongs to the first type; the displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in a preset display position on a search result page, comprises: displaying the artificial intelligence answer result above respective search results on the search result page (Fig.11; LaRhette – Figure 11 illustrates the AI generated result being displayed above and to the left of other search results… par [0059], [0072-0073], Zhu – search results are displayed within different regions and within result cards based on a criteria; wherein the AI generated results of LaRhette can be displayed above (or anywhere else) the other respective search results).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of LaRhette in view of Zhu, disclose the search result display method according to claim 1, wherein the search type corresponding to the search information belongs to the second type; the displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in a preset display position on a search result page, comprises:
displaying a structured artificial intelligence answer result in the preset display position on the search result page, wherein the structured artificial intelligence answer result comprises a plurality of structured answers and comparison information between the plurality of structured answers, and each structured answer comprises information under a plurality of content dimensions (Figs.10 &11; LaRhette).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of LaRhette in view of Zhu, disclose the search result display method according to claim 1, wherein the displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in a preset display position on a search result page, comprises:
displaying a target consumption window in the preset display position, and displaying at least part of content of the artificial intelligence answer result within the target consumption window; updating and displaying the artificial intelligence answer result within the target consumption window in response to a slide operation for the target consumption window (par [0070], [0073], Zhu - respective search results of a same search intention are displayed in a same region on the search result page, so that the user may continuously consume search results corresponding to a certain search intention, which improves efficiency of the user in consuming the search results… The user may switch between displaying different search result cards by sliding along the preset direction, so that the target search results related to the respective search intentions may be presented more flexibly).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of LaRhette in view of Zhu, disclose the search result display method according to claim 1, wherein, after the displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in a preset display position on a search result page, the method further comprises:
in response to a trigger operation for the artificial intelligence answer result, displaying an artificial intelligence search page, displaying entire content of the artificial intelligence answer result and instruction information for instructing to input question information on the artificial intelligence search page, to update the artificial intelligence answer result according to the question information (Fig.11; par [0128-0129], LaRhette – the user interface includes AI answers and discovery through visual search stories… preferences may be utilized to update search results and/or single answer in real time… par [0145], LaRhette - a user device generates a proposed search result based on the initial search query and a user device displays, by the browser-based search interface, the proposed search result to the user).
Claim 9 contains similar subject matter as claim 1 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of LaRhette in view of Zhu, disclose a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, having a computer program stored thereon, wherein the computer program, when run by a processor, executes the search result display method according to claim 1 (par [0033], [0041], LaRhette – machine-readable mediums for using a browser-based interface combined with generative artificial intelligence (GenAI or GAI) to provide an interactive search component).
Claims 10 and 12-18 contain similar subject matter as claims 1-8 above; and are rejected under the same rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: before the acquiring an artificial intelligence answer result corresponding to the search information, the method further comprises: displaying the search results corresponding to the search information and prompt information on the search result page, wherein the prompt information is used to prompt that the artificial intelligence answer result is being generated; the displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in a preset display position on a search result page, comprises: canceling a display of the prompt information and displaying the artificial intelligence answer result in the preset display position.
Points of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHELCIE L DAYE whose telephone number is (571) 272-3891. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30-4:00pm. 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, Apu Mofiz can be reached on 571-272-4080. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Chelcie Daye
Patent Examiner
Technology Center 2100
June 25, 2026
/CHELCIE L DAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2161
Prosecution Insights