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 .
Prior Art
Listed herein below are the prior art references relied upon in this Office Action:
Mauro et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2014/0258324), referred to as Mauro herein [cited in Applicant’s IDS dated 10/14/2024].
Davis et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2011/0161076), referred to as Davis herein.
Ju et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2006/0056612), referred to as Ju herein.
Chien (US Patent Application Publication 2014/0033326), referred to as Chien herein.
Examiner’s Note
Strikethrough notation in the pending claims has been added by the Examiner.
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, 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) 2-5 and 7-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mauro in view of Davis in further view of Ju.
Regarding claim 2, Mauro discloses a method, comprising: at an electronic device (Mauro, ¶0165-¶0167 – computer processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory):
while displaying a first user interface, receiving a user request to initiate an interactive session; in response to receiving the user request to initiate the interactive session, initiating a current interactive session of an interactive user interface, including: displaying the interactive user interface, different from the first user interface (Mauro, Fig. 3 with ¶0036 – invocation input to initiate a session with the assistant. ¶0061-¶0064 – user inputs text or speech into the task assistant. Input is interpreted as a command that may cause a response to be displayed. ¶0059-¶0064 – task assistant has a separate interface from the underlying application. ¶0024, ¶0042 – task assistant overlay);
and obtaining a user input including a query (Mauro, Fig. 6 with ¶0088 – user input query);
determining whether the user request satisfies a first predetermined condition, wherein: the user request to initiate the interactive session satisfies the first predetermined condition
the previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends by ceasing to display the interactive user interface (Mauro, Fig. 3 with ¶0024, ¶0066 – task assistant is terminated after a timeout period or manually); and
user input. Output is displayed in response to user input. Figs. 5D, 5E and 7 with ¶0099, ¶0108 – output from processing the previous user input is displayed. Examples include a receipt or data summary. ¶0037 – context includes all prior interactions which have not been terminated. ¶0043-¶0044, ¶0074, ¶0088 – context is used to process responses to user inputs).
However, Mauro appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Davis discloses task assistance via a phone, including conversational instructions (Davis, Abstract, ¶0617-¶0618), including
using context data from the previous interactive session to determine a response to the query (Davis, ¶0618 – conversational session can be saved and restored at a later time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the context of Mauro to include restoring a saved conversation based on the teachings of Davis. The motivation for doing so would have been enable the user to continue a conversation at a later time that is more convenient or desirable (Davis, ¶0618).
However, Mauro as modified appears not to expressly disclose within a predetermined duration after a previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends, using context data from the previous interactive session.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Patel discloses a dialog-based automated task system (Ju, Abstract with ¶0040-¶0042), including
in accordance with a determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session within a predetermined duration after a previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends using context data from the previous interactive session (Ju, Fig. 5 with ¶0040, ¶0043-¶0044 – previous task session context can be restored if the previous session was within a specified timeframe).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the resuming a previous context of Mauro as modified to include suggesting restoring a conversation within a certain timeframe based on the teachings of Ju. The motivation for doing so would have been allow the user to more conveniently resume a previous context, and to assist the user in identifying a previous context (Ju, ¶0007, ¶0048).
Regarding claim 3, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses the previous interactive session was initiated on the electronic device prior to displaying the first user interface (Mauro, Fig. 3 with ¶0036 – invocation input to initiate a session with the assistant. Fig. 3 with ¶0024, ¶0066 – task assistant is terminated after a timeout period or manually. Ju, Fig. 5 with ¶0040, ¶0043-¶0044 – previous task session context can be restored if the previous session was within a specified timeframe).
Regarding claim 4, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses at the electronic device: in accordance with a determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session does not satisfy the first predetermined condition: determining a second response to the query without using the context data; and providing the second response to the query (Mauro, ¶0037, ¶0115 – the context/log is removed after the process is terminated and timer expires. Ju, Fig. 5 with ¶0043 – if the caller has not called within the selected time period, the call is processed without the previous context).
Regarding claim 5, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above, and further discloses wherein prior to displaying the first user interface, the electronic device causes the context data to be stored in a context history, and wherein the method further comprises: at the electronic device: in accordance with a determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session does not satisfy the first predetermined condition, causing the stored context data to be removed from the context history (Mauro, ¶0037, ¶0115 – the context/log is removed after the process is terminated. ¶0134 – process is terminated when it is determined that the user indicates being done. Ju, Abstract, ¶0043 – context is stored from previous call. Fig. 5 with ¶0043 – if the caller has not called within the selected time period, the call is processed without the previous context).
Regarding claim 7, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above and further discloses at the electronic device: determining whether the user request to initiate the interactive session satisfies a second predetermined condition; and in accordance with a determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session satisfies the second predetermined condition: enabling the displayed interactive user interface to display previous dialogue from the previous interactive session (Mauro, ¶0118 – display previous query. Ju, ¶0039 – previous call information can be purged after a storage time period expires. ¶0040 – the purge time period is different than the prescribed time between the matched call and the current call. Fig. 6 with ¶0048 – enabling the user to navigate among previous contexts).
Regarding claim 8, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 7 above and further discloses wherein the user request to initiate the interactive session satisfies the second predetermined condition if the user request is received within a second predetermined duration after the previous interactive session ends (Ju, ¶0039 – previous call information can be purged after a storage time period expires. ¶0040 – the purge time period is different than the prescribed time between the matched call and the current call).
Regarding claim 9, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 8 above and further discloses wherein the first predetermined duration is shorter than the second predetermined duration (Ju, ¶0039-¶0040 - the prescribed time between the matched call and the current call is based on a matched call within non-yet-purged call context).
Regarding claim 10, Mauro discloses the elements of claim 7 above, and further discloses wherein prior to displaying the first user interface, the electronic device causes the previous dialogue to be stored in a conversation history, the method further comprising: at the electronic device: in accordance with a determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session does not satisfy the second predetermined condition, causing the previous dialog to be removed from the conversation history (Mauro, ¶0037 – conversation context is removed from previous sessions. Ju, ¶0039 – previous call information can be purged after a storage time period expires).
Regarding claim 11, Mauro discloses the elements of claim 7 above, and further discloses at the electronic device: detecting user input via the displayed interactive user interface; in accordance with detecting the user input and in accordance with the determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session satisfies the second predetermined condition, displaying the previous dialogue in the displayed interactive user interface (Mauro, ¶0118 – display previous dialog. See also Fig. 5B with ¶0096. Ju, Fig. 5 with ¶0039--¶0044 – previous task session context can be restored if the previous session was within a specified timeframe and prior to being purged. Fig. 6 with ¶0048 – enabling the user to navigate among previous contexts).
Regarding claim 12, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 11 above, and further discloses at the electronic device: while displaying the previous dialogue, receiving a user request to activate a microphone of the electronic device; in accordance with receiving the user request to activate the microphone, obtaining second audio data containing a second spoken query (Mauro, Figs. 4B-4E and 5A with ¶0068-¶0073, ¶0076 – prompt for the user to issue a voice input while showing the previous dialog. Subsequent user input can prompt the “listening” stage to be re-entered to be used to capture subsequent voice input. Ju, ¶0028 - microphone);
in accordance with detecting the user input and in accordance with the determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session does not satisfy the first predetermined condition and satisfies the second predetermined condition: using the context data from the previous interactive session to determine a response to the second spoken query; and providing, by the interactive session, the response to the second spoken query (Mauro, Fig. 5A with ¶0076 – voice input. Ju, Fig. 6 with ¶0048 – enabling the user to navigate among previous contexts).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the input devices of Mauro as modified to include a microphone based on the teachings of Ju. The motivation for doing so would have been to realize the voice input of Mauro via known and widely available hardware.
Regarding claim 13, Mauro discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for operating a digital assistant, wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, cause the electronic device to perform operations comprising (Mauro, ¶0165-¶0167 – computer processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory. Fig. 3 with ¶0036 – invocation input to initiate a session with the assistant):
while displaying a first user interface, receive a user request to initiate an interactive session; in response to receiving the user request to initiate the interactive session, initiate a current interactive session of an interactive user interface, including: display the interactive user interface, different from the first user interface (Mauro, Fig. 3 with ¶0036 – invocation input to initiate a session with the assistant. ¶0061-¶0064 – user inputs text or speech into the task assistant. Input is interpreted as a command that may cause a response to be displayed. ¶0059-¶0064 – task assistant has a separate interface from the underlying application. ¶0024, ¶0042 – task assistant overlay); and
obtain a user input including a query (Mauro, Fig. 6 with ¶0088 – user input query);
determine whether the user request satisfies a first predetermined condition, wherein: the user request to initiate the interactive session satisfies the first predetermined condition
the previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends by ceasing to display the interactive user interface (Mauro, Fig. 3 with ¶0024, ¶0066 – task assistant is terminated after a timeout period or manually); and
i
However, Mauro appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Davis discloses task assistance via a phone, including conversational instructions (Davis, Abstract, ¶0617-¶0618), including
using context data from the previous interactive session to determine a response to the query (Davis, ¶0618 – conversational session can be saved and restored at a later time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the context of Mauro to include restoring a saved conversation based on the teachings of Davis. The motivation for doing so would have been enable the user to continue a conversation at a later time that is more convenient or desirable (Davis, ¶0618).
However, Mauro as modified appears not to expressly disclose within a predetermined duration after a previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends, using context data from the previous interactive session.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Patel discloses a dialog-based automated task system (Ju, Abstract with ¶0040-¶0042), including
in accordance with a determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session within a predetermined duration after a previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends using context data from the previous interactive session (Ju, Fig. 5 with ¶0040, ¶0043-¶0044 – previous task session context can be restored if the previous session was within a specified timeframe).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the resuming a previous context of Mauro as modified to include suggesting restoring a conversation within a certain timeframe based on the teachings of Ju. The motivation for doing so would have been allow the user to more conveniently resume a previous context, and to assist the user in identifying a previous context (Ju, ¶0007, ¶0048).
Regarding claim 14, Mauro discloses an electronic device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions for operating a digital assistant, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising (Mauro, ¶0165-¶0167 – computer processor executing instructions stored in hardware memory. Fig. 3 with ¶0036 – invocation input to initiate a session with the assistant):
while displaying a first user interface, receiving a user request to initiate an interactive session; in response to receiving the user request to initiate the interactive session, initiating a current interactive session of an interactive user interface, including: displaying the interactive user interface, different from the first user interface (Mauro, Fig. 3 with ¶0036 – invocation input to initiate a session with the assistant. ¶0061-¶0064 – user inputs text or speech into the task assistant. Input is interpreted as a command that may cause a response to be displayed. ¶0059-¶0064 – task assistant has a separate interface from the underlying application. ¶0024, ¶0042 – task assistant overlay); and
obtaining a user input including a query (Mauro, Fig. 6 with ¶0088 – user input query);
determining whether the user request satisfies a first predetermined condition, wherein: the user request to initiate the interactive session satisfies the first predetermined condition
the previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends by ceasing to display the interactive user interface (Mauro, Fig. 3 with ¶0024, ¶0066 – task assistant is terminated after a timeout period or manually); and
However, Mauro appears not to expressly disclose the limitations in strikethrough above.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Davis discloses task assistance via a phone, including conversational instructions (Davis, Abstract, ¶0617-¶0618), including
using context data from the previous interactive session to determine a response to the query (Davis, ¶0618 – conversational session can be saved and restored at a later time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the context of Mauro to include restoring a saved conversation based on the teachings of Davis. The motivation for doing so would have been enable the user to continue a conversation at a later time that is more convenient or desirable (Davis, ¶0618).
However, Mauro as modified appears not to expressly disclose within a predetermined duration after a previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends, using context data from the previous interactive session.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Patel discloses a dialog-based automated task system (Ju, Abstract with ¶0040-¶0042), including
in accordance with a determination that the user request to initiate the interactive session within a predetermined duration after a previous interactive session of the interactive user interface ends using context data from the previous interactive session (Ju, Fig. 5 with ¶0040, ¶0043-¶0044 – previous task session context can be restored if the previous session was within a specified timeframe).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the resuming a previous context of Mauro as modified to include suggesting restoring a conversation within a certain timeframe based on the teachings of Ju. The motivation for doing so would have been allow the user to more conveniently resume a previous context, and to assist the user in identifying a previous context (Ju, ¶0007, ¶0048).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mauro in view of Davis in further view of Ju in further view of Chien.
Regarding claim 6, Mauro as modified discloses the elements of claim 2 above. However, Mauro as modified appears not to expressly disclose wherein the user request to initiate the interactive session does not satisfy the first predetermined condition if the electronic device is in a locked state while receiving the user request to initiate the interactive session.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chien discloses managing messaging and productivity applications (Chien, ¶0029), including
wherein the user request to initiate the interactive session does not satisfy the first predetermined condition if the electronic device is in a locked state while receiving the user request to initiate the interactive session (Chien. Fig. 4A-4B with ¶0074-¶0081 – application access controls enable the user to block applications from being accessed, or limit functionality for specific applications, while the device is locked).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the task application of Mauro as modified to include blocking or limiting access while the device is locked based on the teachings of Chien. The motivation for doing so would have been to more effectively prevent unauthorized access (Chien, ¶0002-¶0003), especially to personal conversation history.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL W PARCHER whose telephone number is (303)297-4281. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm, Mountain Time.
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, William Bashore can be reached at (571)272-4088 (Eastern Time). 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.
/DANIEL W PARCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174
