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 .
This office action is in response to application 18773058 filed on July 15, 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the applicant’s submissions of the Information Disclosure Statements dated July 15, 2024, November 14, 2024, and April 14, 2025 are acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609, a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed and dated by the examiner is attached to the office action.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12039150B2 (hereinafter referred to as “the reference patent 1”) in view of Smith et al. (U.S. Publication 20170359189A1).
Regrading claim 1, the reference patent 1 recites:
A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising (A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising)(claim 1):
determining, based at least in part on one or more current statuses corresponding to one or more third-party computing devices connected to a local network to which a computing device is also connected, a current context of a user, wherein the computing device provides access to an automated assistant and the automated assistant is controllable via a graphical user interface of the computing device, and wherein the one or more current statuses indicate one or more actions currently being performed by the corresponding one or more third-party computing devices (determining, based at least in part on one or more current statuses corresponding to one or more third-party computing devices connected to a local network to which a computing device is also connected, a current context of a user, wherein the computing device provides access to an automated assistant and the automated assistant is controllable via a graphical user interface of the computing device, and wherein the one or more current statuses indicate one or more actions currently being performed by the corresponding one or more third-party computing devices)(claim 1);
identifying, based on the current context of the user, one or more selection categories, wherein each selection category includes a corresponding set of actions to recommend to the user via the graphical user interface of the computing device (identifying, based on the current context of the user, one or more selection categories, wherein each selection category corresponds to a set of actions to recommend to the user via the graphical user interface of the computing device)(claim 1),
wherein identifying a given selection category of the one or more selection categories is based on a degree of similarity between the current context of the user and a prior context in which the user previously commanded the automated assistant to initialize performance of the set of actions (wherein identifying a given selection category of the one or more selection categories is based on a degree of similarity between the current context of the user and a prior context in which the user previously commanded the automated assistant to initialize performance of the set of actions)(claim 1);
generating, based on identifying the one or more selection categories, one or more categorical selection elements, wherein each categorical selection element includes one or more action suggestion elements for the corresponding set of actions (generating, based on identifying the one or more selection categories ... the one or more actions to the selection categories, an action suggestion element for each assigned action of the one or more actions)(claim 1; graphical elements are generated for presentation);
causing … the one or more selection categories, one or more of the categorical selection elements to be rendered at the graphical user interface of the computing device (causing each action suggestion element to be rendered at the graphical user interface of the computing device)(claim 1);
receiving a user selection of a particular action suggestion element of the one or more action suggestion elements that correspond to a particular selection category of the one or more selection categories (wherein the automated assistant performs a corresponding action, of the one or more actions assigned to the one or more selection categories, in response to the user selecting a corresponding action suggestion element)(claim 1; user interaction selects a presented element).
Reference patent 1 does not teach presenting selection categories according to a ranking, receiving user selection of an action corresponding to a selection category, updating the ranking, and rendering selection categories according to the updated ranking.
However, Smith teaches presenting selection categories according to a ranking, receiving user selection of an action corresponding to a selection category, updating the ranking, and rendering selection categories according to the updated ranking (FIG. 13 illustrates an example graphical user interface 1300 for presenting a service group ... GUI 1300 can be presented by home application 304 in response to a user selecting a service group (e.g., the “Family Room” service group), as described with reference to FIG. 8 ... service group now includes two smart lamps (e.g., lamps 408 and 410) that have a common dimmer control and two speakers that have a common volume control ... The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use ... the user provides input to manipulate volume control 1308 to specify a speaker volume ... FIG. 15 illustrates an example graphical user interface 1500 for selecting an automatically generated service group … home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0136], [0137], [0138], [0141], and [0228]; Figures 8 and 15 – presenting selection categories (i.e., service groups such as “Family Room”, “Front Door Security”, etc.) in an initial order is shown; the order of presentation is updated based on selection of actions (i.e., features such as volume control) within a service group).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to present selection categories based on ranking, update the ranking based on user interaction, and render an updated presentation, as disclosed in Smith, within the method of claim 1 of the reference patent 1, to present selection categories based on frequency of use (order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]). This would allow for improved useability.
Regrading claim 2, the reference patent 1 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 1, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of the particular selection category to be updated (Smith - home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]; selection of features (i.e., actions such as volume control) within the selection category updates the frequency selection).
Regrading claim 3, the reference patent 1 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 1, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of an additional selection category, of the one or more selection categories, to be updated (Smith - home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]; selection of features (i.e., actions such as volume control) within the selection category updates the frequency of the selection category and causes it to be higher than another selection category).
Regrading claim 4, the reference patent 1 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 1, wherein one or more of the action suggestion elements are rendered within each of the categorical selection elements based on an initial ranking of the one or more action suggestion elements (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]).
Regrading claim 5, the reference patent 1 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 4, further comprising: causing, in response to the user selection of the particular action suggestion element, the initial ranking of one or more of the action suggestion elements to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates frequency selection of controls).
Regrading claim 6, the reference patent 1 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 5, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of the particular action suggestion element to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates its frequency selection).
Regrading claim 7, the reference patent 1 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 5, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of an additional action suggestion element, of the one or more action suggestion elements, to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates its frequency selection and causes it to be higher than another control).
Regrading claim 8, the reference patent 1 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 5, further comprising: adapting, in response to the updating of the initial ranking of one or more of the action suggestion elements, the rendering of the action suggestion elements at the graphical user interface (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; as controls are presented based on frequency of use, updating frequency of use will update its presentation).
Regarding system claims 9-16, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1-8, and recite similar features in system form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 17-20, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1-4, and recite similar features in system form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 8, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 11579749B2 (hereinafter referred to as “the reference patent 2”) in view of Smith.
Regrading claim 1, the reference patent 2 recites:
A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising (A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising)(claim 1):
determining, based at least in part on one or more current statuses corresponding to one or more third-party computing devices connected to a local network to which a computing device is also connected, a current context of a user, wherein the computing device provides access to an automated assistant and the automated assistant is controllable via a graphical user interface of the computing device, and wherein the one or more current statuses indicate one or more actions currently being performed by the corresponding one or more third-party computing devices (determining, based at least in part on one or more current statuses corresponding to one or more third-party computing devices connected to a local network to which a computing device is also connected, a current context of a user, wherein the computing device provides access to an automated assistant and the automated assistant is controllable via a graphical user interface of the computing device, and wherein the one or more current statuses indicate one or more actions currently being performed by the corresponding one or more third-party computing devices)(claim 1);
identifying, based on the current context of the user, one or more selection categories, wherein each selection category includes a corresponding set of actions to recommend to the user via the graphical user interface of the computing device (identifying, based on the current context of the user, one or more selection categories, wherein each selection category corresponds to a set of actions to recommend to the user via the graphical user interface of the computing device)(claim 1),
wherein identifying a given selection category of the one or more selection categories is based on a degree of similarity between the current context of the user and a prior context in which the user previously commanded the automated assistant to initialize performance of the set of actions (wherein identifying each selection category of the one or more selection categories is based on a degree of similarity between the current context of the user and a prior context in which the user previously commanded the automated assistant to initialize performance of the set of actions)(claim 1);
generating, based on identifying the one or more selection categories, one or more categorical selection elements, wherein each categorical selection element includes one or more action suggestion elements for the corresponding set of actions (generating, based on identifying the one or more selection categories ... a categorical suggestion element for each identified selection category ... an action suggestion element for each assigned action of the one or more actions)(claim 1);
causing … the one or more selection categories, one or more of the categorical selection elements to be rendered at the graphical user interface of the computing device (causing each categorical suggestion element and each action suggestion element to be rendered at the graphical user interface of the computing device)(claim 1);
receiving a user selection of a particular action suggestion element of the one or more action suggestion elements that correspond to a particular selection category of the one or more selection categories (wherein the automated assistant performs a corresponding action in response to the user selecting a corresponding action suggestion element via the graphical user interface)(claim 1; user interaction selects a presented element).
Reference patent 2 does not teach presenting selection categories according to a ranking, receiving user selection of an action corresponding to a selection category, updating the ranking, and rendering selection categories according to the updated ranking.
However, Smith teaches presenting selection categories according to a ranking, receiving user selection of an action corresponding to a selection category, updating the ranking, and rendering selection categories according to the updated ranking (FIG. 13 illustrates an example graphical user interface 1300 for presenting a service group ... GUI 1300 can be presented by home application 304 in response to a user selecting a service group (e.g., the “Family Room” service group), as described with reference to FIG. 8 ... service group now includes two smart lamps (e.g., lamps 408 and 410) that have a common dimmer control and two speakers that have a common volume control ... The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use ... the user provides input to manipulate volume control 1308 to specify a speaker volume ... FIG. 15 illustrates an example graphical user interface 1500 for selecting an automatically generated service group … home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0136], [0137], [0138], [0141], and [0228]; Figures 8 and 15 – presenting selection categories (i.e., service groups such as “Family Room”, “Front Door Security”, etc.) in an initial order is shown; the order of presentation is updated based on selection of actions (i.e., features such as volume control) within a service group).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to present selection categories based on ranking, update the ranking based on user interaction, and render an updated presentation, as disclosed in Smith, within the method of claim 1 of the reference patent 2, to present selection categories based on frequency of use (order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]). This would allow for improved useability.
Regrading claim 2, the reference patent 2 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 1, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of the particular selection category to be updated (Smith - home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]; selection of features (i.e., actions such as volume control) within the selection category updates the frequency selection).
Regrading claim 3, the reference patent 2 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 1, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of an additional selection category, of the one or more selection categories, to be updated (Smith - home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]; selection of features (i.e., actions such as volume control) within the selection category updates the frequency of the selection category and causes it to be higher than another selection category).
Regrading claim 4, the reference patent 2 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 1, wherein one or more of the action suggestion elements are rendered within each of the categorical selection elements based on an initial ranking of the one or more action suggestion elements (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]).
Regrading claim 5, the reference patent 2 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 4, further comprising: causing, in response to the user selection of the particular action suggestion element, the initial ranking of one or more of the action suggestion elements to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates frequency selection of controls).
Regrading claim 6, the reference patent 2 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 5, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of the particular action suggestion element to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates its frequency selection).
Regrading claim 7, the reference patent 2 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 5, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of an additional action suggestion element, of the one or more action suggestion elements, to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates its frequency selection and causes it to be higher than another control).
Regrading claim 8, the reference patent 2 in view of Smith recites:
The method of claim 5, further comprising: adapting, in response to the updating of the initial ranking of one or more of the action suggestion elements, the rendering of the action suggestion elements at the graphical user interface (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; as controls are presented based on frequency of use, updating frequency of use will update its presentation).
Regarding system claims 9-16, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1-8, and recite similar features in system form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 17-20, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1-4, and recite similar features in system form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McLaughlin et al. (US Publication 20180091381A1) in further view of Uppala et al. (US Publication 20160378080A1) and Smith.
Regarding claim 1, McLaughlin teaches a method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising:
determining, based at least in part on one or more current statuses corresponding to one or more third-party computing devices connected to a local network to which a computing device is also connected, a … context … wherein the computing device provides access to an automated assistant and the automated assistant is controllable via a graphical user interface of the computing device, and wherein the one or more current statuses indicate one or more actions currently being performed by the corresponding one or more third-party computing devices (the user device can determine which accessory states and contexts represent normal accessory states in the respective contexts … user device 302 can include home application 304 … can collect context information associated with accessory state changes ... the context information can include a timestamp ... can include information describing a duration ... can include information describing which user devices are in home environment 400 ... can include detected events that occur within home environment 400 ... FIG. 5 is an example graphical user interface 500 presented by home application 304 … GUI 500 can include status element 501 ... can present accessory status data reported by the various accessories ... connected to ... home application 304 ... GUI 500 can include graphical elements 502-508 representing accessories that have been paired with home application 304 ... graphical elements 502-508 can appear as tiles that include information (e.g., accessory type, location, status, etc.) ... The user can select (e.g., tap) any of the tiles to turn on and off ... the corresponding accessory)([0005], [0057], [0076], and [0103-0106]; statuses of third party devices (i.e. accessories) are received and contextual information is determined, Figure 5 – an exemplary user interface to control an automated assistant (i.e. home application) is shown);
identifying, based on the … context … one or more selection categories, wherein each selection category includes a corresponding set of actions to recommend to the user via the graphical user interface of the computing device (“service groups” that can include any set of accessories the user may desire to control together ... can be homogeneous (e.g., all upstairs lights) or heterogeneous (e.g., a light, a fan, and a TV) … home application 304 can implement a relatedness algorithm to determine associations between accessories based on recorded (e.g., historical) accessory state changes ... Home application 304 (or home daemon 305) can analyze the state change transactions using the relatedness algorithm to determine associations between accessories over time … For example, home application 304 can determine the number of times the coffee maker is turned on within one minute of the light being turned on based on the accessory state change event data in database 308 … home application 304 and/or home daemon 345 can automatically generate service group suggestions based on related accessories)([0079], [0080], [0081], and [0086]; based on contextual information selection categories (i.e., service groups) are identified; service groups include a set of actions (e.g. turn on light, turn on fan, etc.)), wherein identifying a given selection category of the one or more selection categories is based on a degree of similarity between the current context of the user and a prior context in which the user previously commanded the automated assistant to initialize performance of the set of actions (home application 304 can learn, based on historical accessory state change data, which accessories the user typically uses together and/or what settings or states the user specifies for the accessories and generate service groups)([0060]);
generating, based on identifying the one or more selection categories, one or more categorical selection elements, wherein each categorical selection element includes one or more action suggestion elements for the corresponding set of actions (For example, home application 304 can create a service group (e.g., “Front Door Security”) that includes light 402, lock 403, camera 404, and/or doorbell 406, as described in scenario ‘A’ ... (e.g., “Living Room Lights”) that includes lamp 408 and lamp 410, as described in scenario ‘B’ ... After generating the service group, home application 304 can present a service group suggestion on a graphical user interface of home application 304)([0086]).
McLaughlin differs from the claim in that McLaughlin fails to teach determining a current context of a user.
However, determining a current context of a user is taught by Uppala (the computing device 102 may resolve ambiguous parameters of the command using context data. The context data may include conversational context data as well as context data based on the current user and/or on the state of the home automation devices 106 … For example, when supplied with the input text “Turn on the lights,” the computing device 102 may identify ... user context data (e.g., where is the user located), and/or device context data (e.g., what lights in the system are not currently on))([0015]).
The examiner notes McLaughlin and Uppala teach a method for controlling an automated assistant. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McLaughlin to include the determining of Uppala such that the method determines a current context of a user. One would be motivated to make such a combination to aid in identifying interrelated conditions by factoring in setting of user and connected accessory devices.
McLaughlin-Uppala differs from the claim in that McLaughlin-Uppala fails to teach presenting selection categories according to a ranking, receiving user selection of an action corresponding to a selection category, updating the ranking, and rendering selection categories according to the updated ranking.
However, presenting selection categories according to a ranking, receiving user selection of an action corresponding to a selection category, updating the ranking, and rendering selection categories according to the updated ranking is taught by Smith (FIG. 13 illustrates an example graphical user interface 1300 for presenting a service group ... GUI 1300 can be presented by home application 304 in response to a user selecting a service group (e.g., the “Family Room” service group), as described with reference to FIG. 8 ... service group now includes two smart lamps (e.g., lamps 408 and 410) that have a common dimmer control and two speakers that have a common volume control ... The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use ... the user provides input to manipulate volume control 1308 to specify a speaker volume ... FIG. 15 illustrates an example graphical user interface 1500 for selecting an automatically generated service group … home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0136], [0137], [0138], [0141], and [0228]; Figures 8 and 15 – presenting selection categories (i.e., service groups such as “Family Room”, “Front Door Security”, etc.) in an initial order is shown; the order of presentation is updated based on selection of actions (i.e., features such as volume control) within a service group).
The examiner notes McLaughlin, Uppala, and Smith teach a method for controlling an automated assistant. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McLaughlin-Uppala to include the presenting, the receiving, the updating, the rendering of Smith such that the method presents selection categories according to a ranking, receives user selection of an action corresponding to a selection category, updates the ranking, and renders selection categories to the updated ranking. One would be motivated to make such a combination to aid useability.
Regarding claim 2, McLaughlin-Uppala-Smith teach the method of claim 1, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of the particular selection category to be updated (Smith - home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]; selection of features (i.e., actions such as volume control) within the selection category updates the frequency selection).
Regarding claim 3, McLaughlin-Uppala-Smith teach the method of claim 1, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of an additional selection category, of the one or more selection categories, to be updated (Smith - home application 304 can select a service group control or order the presentation of service group controls based on which service group control (e.g., feature) is most frequently used or selected by the use)([0228]; selection of features (i.e., actions such as volume control) within the selection category updates the frequency of the selection category and causes it to be higher than another selection category).
Regarding claim 4, McLaughlin-Uppala-Smith teach the method of claim 1, wherein one or more of the action suggestion elements are rendered within each of the categorical selection elements based on an initial ranking of the one or more action suggestion elements (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]).
Regarding claim 5, McLaughlin-Uppala-Smith teach the method of claim 4, further comprising: causing, in response to the user selection of the particular action suggestion element, the initial ranking of one or more of the action suggestion elements to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates frequency selection of controls).
Regarding claim 6, McLaughlin-Uppala-Smith teach the method of claim 5, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of the particular action suggestion element to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates its frequency selection).
Regarding claim 7, McLaughlin-Uppala-Smith teach the method of claim 5, wherein the user selection of the particular action suggestion element causes the initial ranking of an additional action suggestion element, of the one or more action suggestion elements, to be updated (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; selection of a control updates its frequency selection and causes it to be higher than another control).
Regarding claim 8, McLaughlin-Uppala-Smith teach the method of claim 5, further comprising: adapting, in response to the updating of the initial ranking of one or more of the action suggestion elements, the rendering of the action suggestion elements at the graphical user interface (Smith - The order in which these two controls are presented can be based on frequency of use)([0137]; as controls are presented based on frequency of use, updating frequency of use will update its presentation).
Regarding system claims 9-16, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1-8, and recite similar features in system form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 17-20, the claims generally correspond to method claims 1-4, and recite similar features in system form; therefore, the claims are rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider the reference fully when responding to this action. The document cited therein and enumerated below teaches a method and apparatus for controlling devices using an automated assistant.
US20130052946A1
US20160091871A1
US20160277203A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yongjia Pan whose telephone number is (571)270-1177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/YONGJIA PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights