DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 9/8/2025 and 3/4/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Double Patenting
The Examiner notes that a terminal disclaimer has been filed in application 18/759,176 linking this application with that application. Since the terminal disclaimer has been approved, no rejections under double patenting are necessary.
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 (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 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)(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.
Claims 5-7, 11-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2025/0284561).
As per claims 5 and 13, Yang et al. discloses:
A first computer system (Figure 15 and Paragraphs [0138-0142]), comprising:
at least one processor (Figure 15, item 1100 and Paragraphs [0138-0142]); and
at least one memory comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Figure 15, items 1400 & 1500 and Paragraphs [0138-0142]), cause the first computer system to:
receive, by the first computer system, first input data, the first computer system corresponding to a first language model (LM) agent (Figure 8 & Figure 14, item S140 and Paragraphs [0107-0112] & [0134] – The receiver/external agent is the first language model agent);
determine that the first input data represents a natural language request to perform a first task (Figure 8, items 152-153 & Figure 14, item S140 and Paragraphs [0107-0112] & [0134-0135] – The original user utterance and generated task are both included);
determine that the first input data includes a first indication that the natural language request is from a second LM agent different from the first LM agent (Figure 8, item 151 & Figure 14, item S140 and Paragraphs [0107-0112] & [0134-0135] – The sender agent & receiver agent are both listed and different);
determine a first LM prompt using the first input data and context data for processing requests from the second LM agent (Figure 9 and paragraphs [0112-0115] – the recipient agent writes a prompt based on the user input and context data);
generate first LM output data by processing the first LM prompt using a first LM corresponding to the first LM agent, the first LM output data representing a natural language response to the natural language request and a second indication that the first LM output data is from the first LM agent (Figure 10 & Figure 14, items S150 & S160 and Paragraphs [0116-0119] & [0135-0136] – the external agent produces output and sends it back to the originating system); and
send the first LM output data to a second computer system corresponding to the second LM agent (Figure 10 & Figure 14, items S150 & S160 and Paragraphs [0116-0119] & [0135-0136] – the external agent produces output and sends it back to the originating system).
Claim 5 is directed to the method of using the system of claim 13, so is rejected for similar reasons.
As per claims 6 and 14, Yang et al. discloses all of the limitations of claims 5 and 13 above. Yang et al. further discloses:
receiving second data representing natural language instructions for how the first LM agent is to handle a task, the second data indicating:
a first instruction to determine whether the first LM agent is capable of handling a task indicated by a natural language message from another LM agent (Paragraph [0075]),
a second instruction to, in response to determining that the first LM agent is capable of handling the task, generate a first response to the other LM agent by processing the natural language message using the first LM (Paragraph [0075]), and
a third instruction to, in response to determining that the first LM agent is not capable of handling the task, generate a second response to the other LM agent indicating that the first LM agent is unable to handle the task (Paragraph [0076]); and
determining the context data using the second data (Paragraph [0111]).
As per claims 7 and 15, Yang et al. discloses all of the limitations of claims 5 and 13 above. Yang et al. further discloses:
receiving second input data representing a second task to be performed by the first LM agent (Paragraph [0029]);
generating, using the second input data and the first LM, second LM output data representing the second task and an indication that the second task is to be performed in response to a command (Paragraph [0029]);
sending a task identifier corresponding to the second task (Figure 8 and paragraphs [0107-0112]);
receiving third input data representing the command and the task identifier (Figure 8 and paragraphs [0107-0112]);
in response to receiving the third input data, generating third LM output data using the second LM output data and the first LM; and performing an action with respect to the third LM output data (Paragraph [0029]).
As per claims 11 and 19, Yang et al. discloses all of the limitations of claims 5 and 13 above. Yang et al. further discloses:
receiving second input data; determining a second LM prompt using the second input data and the context data; generating second LM output data by processing the second LM prompt using the first LM, the second LM output data representing a natural language request to delegate a second task; sending the second LM output data to the second computer system; receiving, from the second computer system, third input data representing a natural language response to the second LM output data; determining a third LM prompt using the second input data and the third input data; generating third LM output data by processing the third LM prompt using the first LM, the third LM output data representing a natural language response to the third input data; and sending the third LM output data to the second computer system (Figure 10 & Figure 14 and Paragraphs [0116-0119] & [0135-0136] – the process can be recursive).
As per claims 12 and 20, Yang et al. discloses all of the limitations of claims 5 and 13 above. Yang et al. further discloses:
sending, to the first LM agent, first text data representing natural language instructions for how the first LM agent is to handle a task, the first text data indicating: a first message format corresponding to messages from other LM agents, the first message format including a first portion identifying the other LM agent and a second portion representing a natural language message generated by the other LM agent, and a second message format corresponding to responses to messages from other LM agents, the second message format including a third portion identifying the other LM agent and a fourth portion representing a natural language response to the other LM (Figure 8 & Figure 140 and Paragraphs [0107-0112] & [0134-0135]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4 are allowed.
Claims 8-10 and 16-18 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.
Examiner Notes
The Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully considers the references in its entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or as disclosed by the Examiner.
Communications via Internet e-mail are at the discretion of the applicant and require written authorization. Should the Applicant wish to communicate via e-mail, including the following paragraph in their response will allow the Examiner to do so:
“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with me concerning any subject matter of this application by electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
Should e-mail communication be desired, the Examiner can be reached at Edwin.Leland@USPTO.gov
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN S LELAND III whose telephone number is (571)270-5678. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Hai Phan can be reached at 571-272-6338. 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.
/EDWIN S LELAND III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2654
Prosecution Insights