DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant's Communication received 08/29/2024 for 18819206. Claims 1-17 are presented.
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 .
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 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/17/2025, 09/18/2025 was filed before the mailing date of a first action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites "the first label allocated to at least one content item" which is unclear if the limitation refers to the "allocating a first label to the AI-generated content" as recited in parent claim 4 or lacks antecedent basis to another allocation of the first label to at least one content item.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pividori et al. (US 20240289540 A1).
As to claim 1, Pividori discloses a method for displaying an artificial intelligence (AI) content executed by one or more processors [para 0061-0062, client device displays content generated by content generator including artificial intelligence] and comprising:
receiving an AI-generated content [para 0061-0062, content generator including artificial intelligence generates content];
outputting the AI-generated content on a display [Figs. 6-7, para 0062-0063, 0067, client device display provides content generated by content generator];
receiving, from a user, a user request to modify a first part of the AI-generated content [Fig. 7, para 0030, 0069, 0075-0076, receive author indication (read: user request) to accept revised text (read: first part) of content generated by content generator, where accepting revisions includes modifying a subset of revisions];
modifying the first part to a user-generated content based on the user request [para 0030-0031, 0076, generate revised draft of generated content including revision accepted (read: user-generated content) by user]; and
outputting a second part of the AI-generated content on the display with a first visual effect [Fig. 7, para 0030-0031, 0067-0069, 0076, 0108, display provides content generated by content generator including another revision (read: second part) with visible highlight (read: first visual effect)].
As to claim 3, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising outputting the user-generated content on the display with a second visual effect, wherein the first visual effect and the second visual effect are different from each other [Fig. 7, para 0067-0069, 0076-0077, 0119, display revised draft including accepted revision with indication (read: second visual effect) of being accepted by author, note different elements of visible highlight and acceptance indication].
As to claim 4, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising
allocating a first label to the AI-generated content [Fig. 10, para 0041, 0076-0077, 0080, generate author attribution for content generated by (read: first label) content generator],
wherein, in response to determining that the first label is allocated to the AI-generated content, the AI-generated content is output on the display together with the first visual effect [Fig. 7, para 0067-0069, 0076, display content generated by content generator with visible highlight based on generating author attribution for content generated by content generator].
As to claim 5, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
allocating a first label to the AI-generated content [Fig. 10, para 0076-0077, 0080, generate author attribution for content generated by (read: first label) content generator], and
allocating a second label to the user-generated content [Fig. 10, para 0076-0077, 0080-0081, generate author attribution indicating acceptance by (read: second label) author for revision accepted by user],
wherein, in response to determining that the second label is allocated to the user-generated content, the user-generated content is output on the display without the first visual effect or together with a second visual effect [Fig. 7, para 0067-0069, 0076-0077, 0119, display revision accepted by user with indication (read: second visual effect) of being accepted by author based on attributing content as accepted by author to accepted revision], and
wherein the first visual effect and the second visual effect are different from each other [para 0067-0069, 0076-0077, 0119, note different elements of visible highlight and acceptance indication].
As to claim 6, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein
the AI-generated content is divided into a plurality of content items according to a predetermined unit and stored in a structured document [Figs. 6-7, para 0064-0068, 0078, content generator generates section lines (read: content items) including sentences (read: predetermined unit) in stored revised manuscript (read: structured document)], and
the first label is allocated to each of the plurality of content items [Fig. 10, para 0041, 0067-0069, 0076-0077, generate author attribution to content generator for sentences including revisions].
As to claim 7, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein the predetermined unit is one [Figs. 6-7, para 0064-0068, section lines include sentences, note strikethrough indicates non-selected alternatives]
As to claim 8, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein, in response to the first part being modified to the user-generated content, the first label allocated to at least one content item associated with the first part in the structured document is deleted or modified to a second label [Fig. 10, para 0031, 0075-0077, 0080-0081, generate author attribution for line of revision generated by content generator in stored revised manuscript as accepted by (read: second label) user on receiving author indication to accept revised text].
As to claim 9, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein, when
the first part is a part of a specific content item [Fig. 7, para 0067-0069, revision generated by content generator included in manuscript (read: specific content item)],
the specific content item is divided into a first sub-content item corresponding to the first part and a second sub-content item [Fig. 7, para 0066-0068, manuscript includes revision generated by content generator and original text (read: second sub-content item)], and
the first label allocated to the first sub-content item is deleted or modified to a second label [Fig. 10, para 0031, 0075-0077, 0080-0081, generate author attribution for line of revision generated by content generator in stored revised manuscript as accepted by (read: second label) user].
As to claim 10, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising
allocating a specific label to the user-generated content [Fig. 10, para 0076-0077, 0080-0081, generate author attribution indicating acceptance by (read: second label) author for revision accepted by user],
wherein, in response to determining that the specific label is allocated to the user-generated content, the user-generated content is output on the display without the first visual effect or together with a second visual effect [Fig. 7, para 0067-0069, 0076-0077, 0119, display revision accepted by user with indication (read: second visual effect) of being accepted by author based on attributing content as accepted by author to accepted revision], and
wherein the first visual effect is different from the second visual effect [para 0067-0069, 0076-0077, 0119, note different elements of visible highlight and acceptance indication].
As to claim 11, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein the first label is allocated by the one or more processors or an external device [para 0042, 0076, 0084-0085, author attribution generated by attribution generator of engine executed by computing system including processor].
As to claim 12, Pividori discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the performance of the method according to claim 1 [para 0085-0086, memory storing software executed by processing system including processor].
As to claim 13, Pividori discloses an apparatus for displaying an artificial intelligence (AI) content, comprising: a communication module; a display; a memory; and one or more processors connected to the memory and configured to execute one or more computer-readable programs stored in the memory, wherein the one or more programs include instructions [Fig. 11, para 0063, 0083-0086, system apparatus includes communication interface system, display, memory, processing system including processor executing software stored in memory] for: performing limitations substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale.
As to claim 14, Pividori discloses a label dynamic control method executed by one or more processors [Fig. 11, para 0063, 0083-0086, computing system including processor executes engine], comprising:
allocating a first label to an AI-generated content [Fig. 10, para 0041, 0061-0062, 0076-0077, 0080, generate author attribution for content generated by (read: first label) content generator including artificial intelligence];
receiving a user request to modify a first part of the AI-generated content [Fig. 7, para 0030, 0069, 0075-0076, receive author indication (read: user request) to accept revised text (read: first part) of content generated by content generator, where accepting revisions includes modifying a subset of revisions];
modifying the first part to a user-generated content based on the user request [para 0030-0031, 0076, generate revised draft of generated content including revision accepted (read: user-generated content) by user]; and
allocating a second label to the user-generated content [Fig. 10, para 0076-0077, 0080-0081, generate author attribution indicating acceptance by (read: second label) author for revision accepted by user].
As to claim 15, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 14,
wherein a second part of the AI-generated content is output together with a first visual effect [Fig. 7, para 0030-0031, 0067-0069, 0076, 0108, display provides content generated by content generator including another revision (read: second part) with visible highlight (read: first visual effect)], and
the user-generated content is output without the first visual effect or together with a second visual effect [Fig. 7, para 0067-0069, 0076-0077, 0119, display revised draft including accepted revision with indication (read: second visual effect) of being accepted by author, note different elements of visible highlight and acceptance indication],
wherein the first visual effect and the second visual effect are different from each other [para 0067-0069, 0076-0077, 0119, note different elements of visible highlight and acceptance indication].
As to claims 16 and 17, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 14 comprising limitations substantially similar to those recited in claims 6 and 7, respectively, and are rejected under similar rationale.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pividori as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Heyns (US 20220414317 A1).
As to claim 2, Pividori discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising outputting the user-generated content on the display … [para 0076, generate revised draft of generated content including revision accepted by user].
However, Pividori does not specifically disclose outputting the user-generated content on the display without the first visual effect.
Heyns discloses outputting the user-generated content on the display without the first visual effect [Fig. 3B, para 0032, 0042, highlight unoriginal segment from user input text (read: user-generated content) within content pane].
Pividori and Heyns are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of content display systems. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the output AI-generated content with a first visual effect and user-generated content as disclosed by Pividori with user-generated content output without a first visual effect as disclosed by Heyns with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Pividori as described above to ensure document originality [Heyns, para 0040].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-5240 and email is linda.huynh@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached M-F between 9am-5pm.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/LINDA HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
Prosecution Insights