NON-FINAL REJECTION, FIRST DETAILED ACTION
Status of Prosecution
The present application 18/752,033, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The application was filed in the Office on June 24, 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending and are all rejected in this rejection. Claims 1and 11 are independent claims.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 5-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Bose et al. (“Bose”), United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0338248A1 published on Oct. 10, 2024, in view of Gillman et al. (“Gillman”), United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0028312A1 published on Jan. 25, 2024 and in further view of in view of Pallikonda et al. (“Pallikonda”), United States Patent Application Publication 2023/0342430 published on Oct. 26, 2023.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Bose in view of Gillman and in further view of in view of Pallikonda and in further view of Pasic et al. (“Pasic”), United States Patent Application Publication published on Sep. 21, 2021.
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 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.
-A.
Claims 1-3, 5-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Bose et al. (“Bose”), United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0338248A1 published on Oct. 10, 2024, in view of Gillman et al. (“Gillman”), United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0028312A1 published on Jan. 25, 2024 and in further view of in view of Pallikonda et al. (“Pallikonda”), United States Patent Application Publication 2023/0342430 published on Oct. 26, 2023.
As to Claim 1, Bose teaches: A method executed by an integration service engine implemented as a computer program within a computing environment, the method comprising:
receiving a request to perform a task (Bose: Fig. 1, [S100], par. 0021, receiving an automation request (i.e. a task));
performing, by artificial intelligence of the integration service engine, a semantic analysis on the request (Bose: par. 0025, tasks are generated, which include creating semantic descriptors of the target interaction element for the task);
determining one or more objects (Bose: par. 0025, a target element (i.e. object) may be determined per the automation request);
generating a code of a robotic process automation to implement the request based on the one or more objects (Bose: Fig. 1 [S500], par. 0025, a set of instructions [35] (i.e. code) is generated based on the tasks based on the target element (i.e. object)).
PNG
media_image1.png
876
672
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bose may not explicitly teach: retrieving one or more relevant connectors based on the semantic analysis; and
generating a code of a robotic process automation to implement the request based on the one or more relevant connectors, the one or more objects.
Gillman teaches in general concepts related to generating and executing computer code by analyzing user-specified data and tasks (Gillman: Abstract). Specifically, Gillman teaches that external applications may be needed for instance to access data to apply a transformation to data (Gillman: par. 0077, “The LLM may perform the user-requested transformation by determining that access to external data is needed to apply the transformation (for instance, adding a column with the price of a certain stock at a given datetime) and fetching the relevant information from, for example and without limitation, a user provided second database, a database provided with the system 100, one or more external data sources ( e.g., via one or more application programming interfaces.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the application to have modified the Bose disclosures and teachings by determining what external applications may be needed and providing connectors via API calls as taught and suggested by Gillman. Such a person would have been motivated to do so with a reasonable expectation of success to allow for the ease if aytinated generated code reducing cognitive burden on the user (Gillman: par. 0003).
Bose and Gillman may not explicitly teach: determining one or more objects and one or more required fields needed for the request;
generating a code of a robotic process automation to implement the request based on the one or more relevant connectors, the one or more objects, and the one or more required fields.
Gillman does further teach the identification of “most important fields” that affect the training and predictive power of the models (Gillman: par. 0044). Pallikonda teaches in general concepts related to software robots that may automatically interact with application programs (Pallikonda: Abstract). Specifically, Pallikonda may interact with applications using identified variable values to be provided to the automated robot for use with applications (Pallionda: par. 0039, variables (i.e. fields) are validated).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to have modify the Bose-Gillman combination by also considering the fields for use with the applications based on the specified tasks as taught and suggested by Pallikonda. Such a person would have done so with an expectation for success, to allow for the determination of valid parameters to allow for the automated performance of the task with minimal human intervention.
As to Claim 2, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Bose further teaches: wherein the request comprises a user input received via a user interface in a form of natural language (Bose: par. 0046, “The task 120 is preferably in natural language (e.g., a layperson description, a semantic description of the task 120, etc.”)
As to Claim 3, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Gillman further teaches: wherein the one or more relevant connectors identify one or more services to be accessed by the robotic process automation (Gillman: par. 0077, programming interfaces are used, which would include determining the services to be accessed).
As to Claim 5, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Bose further teaches: wherein the artificial intelligence of the integration service engine comprises one or more artificial intelligence models (Bose: par. 0054, “The models can be machine learning models (e.g., LLMs, CNNs, DNNs, RNNs, donut models, etc.) but can alternatively include algorithms, rule-based systems, filters, and/or any other suitable systems.”).
As to Claim 6, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Gillman further teaches: wherein the one or more relevant connectors identify one or more services required to complete the request and perform the task (Gillman: par. 0077, programming interfaces are used, which would include determining the services to be accessed).
As to Claim 7, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Bose further teaches: wherein the code comprises a discrete manipulation of the request, the one or more relevant connectors, the one or more objects, and the one or more required fields into the robotic process automation that implements the request and performs the task (Bose: pars. 0042-43, the set of instructions [35] can function to control the RPA bot and take into account the tasks that are generated and determined. Examiner asserts that the connectors, objects and fields per the combination would correspondingly be coded).
As to Claim 8, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Bose further teaches: wherein the integration service engine provide opportunities for user feedback (Bose: par. 0109, the user is able to input whether the set of instructions are correct or incorrect).
As to Claim 9, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Bose further teaches: wherein the code comprises one or more application programmable interface requests corresponding to a one or more services needed for the request (Bose: par. 0121, API calls may be made).
As to Claim 10, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Bose further teaches: wherein the robotic process automation comprises generating and completing one or more application programmable interface requests without any training of a user (Bose: par. 0040, “The RPA bot 30 can: call an application's interaction elements (e.g., perform API calls”).
As to Claim 11, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1. Bose further teaches a processor and memory (Bose: par. 0122).
As to Claim 12, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 2.
As to Claim 13, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 3.
As to Claim 15, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 5.
As to Claim 16, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 6.
As to Claim 17, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 7.
As to Claim 18, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 8.
As to Claim 19, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 9.
As to Claim 20, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 10.
B.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Bose et al. (“Bose”), United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0338248A1 published on Oct. 10, 2024, in view of Gillman et al. (“Gillman”), United States Patent Application Publication 2024/0028312A1 published on Jan. 25, 2024 and in further view of in view of Pallikonda et al. (“Pallikonda”), United States Patent Application Publication 2023/0342430 published on Oct. 26, 2023 in further view of Pasic et al. (“Pasic”), United States Patent Application Publication published on Sep. 21, 2021.
As to Claim 4, Bose, Gillman and Pallikonda teach the elements of claim 1.
Bose, Gilman and Pallikonda may not explicitly teach: wherein the semantic analysis comprises a processing of a natural language of the request by analyzing grammatical structure and relationships between individual words to understand and interpret the task.
Pasic teaches in general concepts related to receiving speech data identifying augmented realty interactions with an augmented reality robot to control the robot (Pasic: Abstract). Specifically, Pasic teaches that the code generation system processed the speech data with a natural language processing model considering grammar rules, structures and such to generate the code for the task to perform (Pasic: col. 4, lines 61 to 65).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the Bose-Gillman-Pallikonda combination utilizing NLP grammatical considerations as taught and suggested by Pasic. Such a person would have done so with an expectation for success, to allow for the determination of valid parameters to allow for using automated NLP grammatical techniques for parsing and generating the code efficiently.
As to Claim 14, it is rejected for similar reasons as claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES T TSAI whose telephone number is (571)270-3916. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 Eastern.
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, Viker Lamardo can be reached on 571-270-5871. 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./JAMES T TSAI
/JAMES T TSAI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2147
Prosecution Insights