DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communication filed on 2/3/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 have been amended.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/1/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that amended claim 1 distinguishes over the combination of Singman and Rosenberg because the prior art does not teach or suggest a method that receives an association request at a dedicated first interface for managing application, establishes a correspondence between a first account the application and a second account of the platform upon authentication, configures the application to obtain interaction content via the second account and present responses as an interaction from the second account, and presents historical interaction and response content in a second interface for managing application associated with the second account. Applicant further contends that Singman is limited to real-time session context capture and handoff within a single entity’s web communication feature, while Rosenberg is limited to current message routing and session authorization, and that there is no motivation to combine the reference to arrive at the claimed long-erm management architecture with account mapped historical synchronization.
These arguments are not persuasive. Singman discloses an automated agent that obtains interaction content from a platform, generates responses, and passes historical conversation recordings and resources provided during the interaction. Rosenberg discloses secure registration and authentication of a messaging application with a platform, including the use of registration packages, secure tokens and user credentials to establish an association between the application and a specific account or entity on the platform. The combination of these teachings renders the claimed features obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that the prior art fails to teach establishing a correspondence between a first account of the application and a second account of the platform, Rosenberg explicitly teaches receiving an application registration packet and registering the messaging application with the platform, along with linking user credentials to a commerce entity account to enable authenticated interaction. This establishes the required account correspondence, for example, see Rosen [0130].
Regarding Applicant’s argument that the prior art does not teach presenting historical sets in a second interface for managing application associated with the second account, Singman teaches capturing and passing sets of historical interaction content and corresponding response content. When combined with Rosenberg’s account association the historical content is associated with the mapped account. Presenting such historical content in a management interface associated with the mapped account represent a predictable and conventional feature in conversational agent platforms for oversight and continuity, for example, see Singman [0023-0024].
Regarding Applicant’s argument that there is no motivation to combine the references, the motivation remains valid. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Rosenberg’s secure authentication and account association techniques with Singman’s automated agent and historical context passing to enable secure, identity consistent automated interaction with the ability to maintain and present historical records associated with a mapped platform account. The result is predictable improvement in the management of integrated conversational applications.
For the reasons set forth above and, in the rejections, below, amended claim 1 remains unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103.
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 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 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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singman et al. (US 2019/0058740) in view of Rosenberg et al. (US 2017/0293954).
Regarding claim 1, Singman discloses a method for managing an application, comprising:
receiving a request for associating a application with a platform (Singman discloses receiving a request (dataset) to associate a communication feature (application) with a website or content platform; see [0053-0054] “a first dataset 408 is sent from the second entity device 406 and received by the web communication service portal 122. The first dataset 408 includes any data that is sent together or separately to the web communication service portal 122 for use by the web communication feature creation service 404. The first dataset 408 includes information 410 that is used to customize the web communication feature. Such information 410 may include a set of destination addresses for the agents of the second entity to which a user should be connected, or a terminating destination address for the second entity” and [0057] “the code piece 414 may include machine readable instructions that when executed, cause the system executing the code to establish communication between a user and a communication destination specified in the code”); and
associating the application with the platform (Singman discloses associating the application (code piece for automated agent) with the platform in response to the received request; see [0056-0057] “With the information 410 received in the first data set 408, the web communication feature creation service 404 may create a piece of code 414, alternatively referred to as a code piece 414. The code piece 414 may then be sent in a second dataset 412 from the web communication service portal 122 to the second entity device 406. The second entity may then use that code piece 414 for integration with secondary content. The code piece 414 may include machine readable instructions that when executed, cause the system executing the code to establish communication between a user and a communication destination specified in the code. In some examples, the code may include a Universal Resource Locator (URL) to resources associated with the web communication service (e.g., 124, FIG. 1).”), to causing the application to:
obtain an interaction content from the platform via the second account (Singman discloses the application obtaining interaction content (messages) from the platform; see [0019] “forward a first message from the user web application to the automated agent server” and [0023] “The automated agent is configured to analyze messages sent to it by a user (i.e., customer)” and [0024] “At some point during the conversation with the automated agent, it may be determined that the conversation should be transferred to a live agent. For example, the automated agent may receive a message for which it cannot adequately respond”);
generate a response content for the interaction content (Singman discloses generating response content; see [0019] “forward a response to the first message from the automated agent server to the user web application” and [0023] “the automated agent may apply various computing functions to such messages in order to facilitate a response. The automated agent may be, for example, an artificial intelligence designed to mimic human conversation” and [0024] “any useful information regarding the user's conversation with the automated agent can be passed to the live agent. This information may include a recording of the user's conversation with the automated agent”); and
trigger providing the response content to the platform (Singman discloses triggering provision of the response back to the platform; see [0019] “forward a response to the first message from the automated agent server to the user web application” and [0024] “The information may also include any resources that were provided to the user by the automated agent. For example, the automated agent may provide various links to fill out online forms or use other web resources”); and
presenting, in a second interface for managing application, a set of historical interaction content and a set of corresponding historical response content of the platform associated with the second account (Singman discloses that the automated agent captures and can pass sets of historical interaction content (user conversation recording) and corresponding historical response content (agent responses and resource provided) associated with interaction on the platform; [0023-0024] “The automated agent is configured to analyze messages sent to it by a user (i.e., customer). Then, the automated agent may apply various computing functions to such messages in order to facilitate a response…The automated agent may also be configured to learn from past experiences and update the functions it uses to formulate responses…the user can be transferred from the automated agent to the live agent. In addition, any useful information regarding the user's conversation with the automated agent can be passed to the live agent. This information may include a recording of the user's conversation with the automated agent. The information may also include any resources that were provided to the user by the automated agent”).
However, the prior art does not explicitly disclose the following:
receiving the request at a first interface for managing application, in response to the request being authenticated establishing a correspondence between a first account of the application and a second account of the platform;
obtain interaction content from the platform via the second account and present the response as an interaction from the second account.
Rosenberg in the field of the same endeavor discloses techniques for a messaging agent platform. In particular, Rosenberg teaches the following:
receiving the request at a first interface for managing application, in response to the request being authenticated establishing a correspondence between a first account of the application and a second account of the platform (In response to the request being authenticated, associating the application with the platform, including establishing a correspondence between a first account of the application to a second account of the platform (Rosenberg discloses authenticating and registering a commerce messaging application with the platform through submission of an application registration package and assignment of a secure token, which results in association of the application with a specific commerce entity account on the platform; [0041] “businesses may be required to submit an application that outlines their intended integration with the messaging system prior to being authorized to use the messaging system”, [0063] “An application may be assigned a secure token that may be used for authentication and the secure reception and sending of information with the messaging system 140”, [0130] “The consumer-to-business service 110 may receive an application registration package in association with the commerce messaging application 593. The consumer-to-business service 110 may register the commerce messaging application 593 for access to a commerce intermediary server in response to the application registration package”, [0143] “a user may be asked to enter their user credentials into a messaging client to empower the messaging client to use the user credentials to arrange for service with a business on behalf of the user. In some cases, however, the user credentials may be retrieved from a local application for the business. A commerce entity may be associated with a local application on the client device and the messaging client may retrieve the user credentials from the local application via deep-linking within the local application”));
obtain interaction content from the platform via the second account and present the response as an interaction from the second account (Rosenberg discloses the interaction occurring in association with the linked and authenticated account and account linking and credential association enables responses to be provided in the context of the associated commerce entity or user account on the platform; [0044-0045] “Businesses may be empowered to customize a user's experience with the business via the messaging system. When first accessing a message thread with a messaging bot, the message thread may be customized by the business in its null or empty state…send a message to the business informing them that a new user is requesting to begin a conversation with the business. This may authorize the business with the messaging system to begin messaging with the user…The business may be provided with an identifier for the user, with the business empowered to use the identifier to retrieve at least a portion of the profile information for the user…The business may retrieve a phone number for the user and match this phone number against its own database of user information”); and
presenting, in a second interface for managing application, a set of historical interaction content and a set of corresponding historical response content of the platform associated with the second account (Singman discloses that the automated agent captures and can pass sets of historical interaction content (user conversation recording) and corresponding historical response content (agent responses and resource provided) associated with interaction on the platform; [0023-0024] “The automated agent is configured to analyze messages sent to it by a user (i.e., customer). Then, the automated agent may apply various computing functions to such messages in order to facilitate a response…The automated agent may also be configured to learn from past experiences and update the functions it uses to formulate responses…the user can be transferred from the automated agent to the live agent. In addition, any useful information regarding the user's conversation with the automated agent can be passed to the live agent. This information may include a recording of the user's conversation with the automated agent. The information may also include any resources that were provided to the user by the automated agent”. When combined with Rosenberg’s account).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the prior art with the teaching of Rosenberg. When Singman combined with Rosenberg’s account association, this historical content is associated with the mapped second account. Presenting such historical sets in a second interface for managing application associated with the second account would have been obvious as a predictable and conventional feature in conversational agent management systems for providing oversight and continuity of platform interactions. One would have been motivated because the predictably of the combination enhances security during the association of applications with platforms, as the prior art address analogous automated interaction handling in web-based messaging environments.
Regarding claim 2, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein receiving the request for associating the application with the platform comprises:
presenting a set of candidate platforms (Rosenberg [0142] “The messaging client may display a user-to-commerce discovery interface on the client device, the user-to-commerce discovery interface comprising a plurality of suggested user-to-commerce options. This plurality of suggested user-to-commerce options may be selected according to one or more of profile information for the user account and promotional consideration information for one or more commerce entities”); and
obtaining the request for associating the application with the platform based on a selection of the platform from the set of candidate platforms (Rosenberg [0145] “The messaging client may receive a user interface selection of a user-to-commerce message thread on a client device 120, the user-to-commerce message thread associated with a commerce entity with a messaging system 140. The messaging client may display a user-to-commerce message thread interface for the user-to-commerce message thread in response to the user interface selection”).
Regarding claim 3, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the interaction content comprises at least one of: a comment content of the platform; a private message content of the platform; or a conversation message of the platform (Singman [0023] “when customers first connect with an entity, they may communicate with an automated agent. The automated agent is configured to analyze messages sent to it by a user (i.e., customer). Then, the automated agent may apply various computing functions to such messages in order to facilitate a response. The automated agent may be, for example, an artificial intelligence designed to mimic human conversation. The automated agent may also be configured to learn from past experiences and update the functions it uses to formulate responses”).
Regarding claim 4, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the conversation message comprises a message for the second account in a group chat conversation (Rosenberg [0146] “A user-to-user message thread may comprise one of a plurality of messages threads. A user-to-user message thread may be displayed with a user-to-user message thread interface, the user-to-user message thread interface organizing the messaging interaction between two or more users. A messaging client may receive a commerce interface control selection in the user-to-user message thread interface on a client device 120, the user-to-user message thread associated with a user-to-user message thread for a plurality of users with a messaging system 140. A commerce interface control selection may comprise a selection of a commerce entity with which to engage in a commerce interaction. The messaging client may display a commerce interface in association with the user-to-user message thread interface, the commerce interface comprising a plurality of commerce configuration options. The commerce interface being displayed in association with the user-to-user message thread interface may comprise at least a portion of the user-to-user message thread interface being visible during display of the commerce interface”), and
the second account is determined based on an authentication process of the request (Rosenberg [0143] “The consumer-to-business service 110 may send user credentials to a commerce entity in association with a user-to-commerce message, the user credentials included in a user-to-commerce message package 535. The user credentials may authenticate a user to the commerce application. In some cases, a user may be asked to enter their user credentials into a messaging client to empower the messaging client to use the user credentials to arrange for service with a business on behalf of the user. In some cases, however, the user credentials may be retrieved from a local application for the business. A commerce entity may be associated with a local application on the client device and the messaging client may retrieve the user credentials from the local application via deep-linking within the local application”).
Regarding claim 5, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
in response to receiving the request, presenting an authentication interface associated with the platform (Rosenberg [0041] “businesses may be required to submit an application that outlines their intended integration with the messaging system prior to being authorized to use the messaging system” and [0043] “After a registration of a messaging bot, which may be performed using non-messaging semantics, the performance of the messaging bot itself by a business may be built on messaging interactions” and [0130] “The consumer-to-business service 110 may receive an application registration package in association with the commerce messaging application 593. The consumer-to-business service 110 may register the commerce messaging application 593 for access to a commerce intermediary server in response to the application registration package”); and
obtaining, via the authentication interface, at least one permission of the platform for the application to authenticate the request (Rosenberg [0063] “An application may be assigned a secure token that may be used for authentication and the secure reception and sending of information with the messaging system 140” and [0130] “The consumer-to-business service 110 may receive an application registration package in association with the commerce messaging application 593. The consumer-to-business service 110 may register the commerce messaging application 593 for access to a commerce intermediary server in response to the application registration package”).
Regarding claim 6, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the application is configured to: obtain the interaction content of the platform via a first interface of the platform; or trigger providing the response content to the platform via a second interface of the platform (Singman [0083] “At step 1116, the automated agent responds by indicating it is ready to communicate with the user and passes any information needed to establish the communication session between the user web application 1102 and the automated agent 1106”).
Regarding claim 7, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
presenting a first interface of the application (Singman [0046] “Step 318, the user device 102 presents the user interface for the web communication feature to the user. Specifically, the user device 102 uses the code for the interface retrieved in steps 314 and 316” and [0052] “The web communication feature creation service 404 may provide a user interface to customers through, for example, a website. The user interface may provide the customer with the tools to create a customized web communication feature that connects users with the desired persons associated with the second entity”);
presenting, in the first interface, an access portal corresponding to the platform (Rosenberg [0081] “The web page may comprise a messaging initiation control 305. Selection of the messaging initiation control 305 by a user may redirect a client device to a messaging client and specifically to a message thread with a messaging bot for the business in the messaging client” and [0047] “this web plugin my instantiate a message-initiation button that, when pressed, takes the activating user to a messaging client and directly to a message thread with the business, which may be an existing message thread or may be a new message thread created in response to the user activating the button”; in summary, the web page interface (first interface) presents a messaging initiation control/button (access portal) that corresponds to accessing the messaging system ( platform) for bot interactions); and
in response to a selection of the access portal, triggering presentation of a second interface of the platform (Singman [0046] “At step 320 the user pushes a button indicating that the user wishes to contact the second entity” and [0057] “The code piece 414 may include machine readable instructions that when executed, cause the system executing the code to establish communication between a user and a communication destination specified in the code” and [0078] “The user web application 1102 may be, for example, a web browser with a WebRTC client or other real-time communication functionality. For example, a user may visit a website associated with a particular entity, or a website that hosts a web communication feature associated with the entity”; in summary, selecting the button in the interface triggers execution of code to establish and present a communication session (second interface) on the web platform).
Regarding claim 8, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the first interface comprises a conversation window with a virtual object, the virtual object corresponding to the application (Singman discloses a web communication feature (first interface) that includes a conversational interaction with an automated agent (virtual object/ application); see [0023-0024] “when customers first connect with an entity, they may communicate with an automated agent. The automated agent is configured to analyze messages sent to it by a user (i.e., customer). Then, the automated agent may apply various computing functions to such messages in order to facilitate a response. The automated agent may be, for example, an artificial intelligence designed to mimic human conversation. The automated agent may also be configured to learn from past experiences and update the functions it uses to formulate responses. At some point during the conversation with the automated agent, it may be determined that the conversation should be transferred to a live agent.” and [0031] “The secondary content 106 includes a web communication feature 105 that when activated by a user, connects the user to an agent 116 of the second entity”), and
the method further comprises: in response to the application being associated with a first account (Singman discloses initiating conversational actions in response to associating the automated agent application with a user account upon connection; see [0023] “when customers first connect with an entity, they may communicate with an automated agent” and [0038] “the secondary content 106 includes a web communication feature 105. When activated by the user, the web communication feature 105 may call on the web communication service 124 to establish a communication session between the user device 102 and an agent device 114a, 114b associated with the second entity” and [0035] “With such an environment, a user 101 may use his or her device 102 (e.g., a laptop computer, desktop computer, mobile phone, etc.) to access the first entity's website 104. While using the first entity's website, the user may notice the second entity's content 106 and wish to interact with the second entity. The user may then activate the web communication feature. Upon activation, the web communication service 124 sets up a communication session between the user's device 102 and one of the agent devices 114a, 114b of the second entity”),
presenting, in the conversation window, a set of historical interaction content and a set of corresponding historical response content of the platform (Singman [0023-0024] “The automated agent may also be configured to learn from past experiences… In addition, any useful information regarding the user's conversation with the automated agent can be passed to the live agent. This information may include a recording of the user's conversation with the automated agent. The information may also include any resources that were provided to the user by the automated agent. For example, the automated agent may provide various links to fill out online forms or use other web resources. A list of the resources provided to the user by the automated agent may thus be given to the live agent.”),
the set of interaction content being sent by a second account corresponding to the first account in the platform (Rosenberg [0044-0045] “empower the business to retrieve identifying information for the user—such as a phone number registered with the user's profile—that they may match against their own repository of customer information, thereby empowering the business to engage in a conversation with the user that incorporates the status that customer has already achieved with the business… The business may retrieve a phone number for the user and match this phone number against its own database of user information. If the user is an existing customer, the business may then be able to respond to the “get started” button with a personalized introduction for the user”), and
the set of historical response content being generated by the application based on the set of interaction contents (Singman [0023-0024] “the automated agent may apply various computing functions to such messages in order to facilitate a response…The information may also include any resources that were provided to the user by the automated agent. For example, the automated agent may provide various links to fill out online forms or use other web resources”).
Regarding claim 9, Singman-Rosenberg discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising:
receiving a query message via the conversation window (Singman [0023-0024] “The automated agent is configured to analyze messages sent to it by a user (i.e., customer)…For example, the automated agent may receive a message for which it cannot adequately respond”); and
displaying a response message in the conversation window, the response message being generated by the application based on the query message and context information, the context information being associated with the set of historical interaction contents and/or the set of historical response contents (Singman discloses displaying generated responses in the conversation, using query and historical context; see [0023-0024] “the automated agent may apply various computing functions to such messages in order to facilitate a response. The automated agent may be, for example, an artificial intelligence designed to mimic human conversation. The automated agent may also be configured to learn from past experiences and update the functions it uses to formulate responses… This information may include a recording of the user's conversation with the automated agent. The information may also include any resources that were provided to the user by the automated agent. For example, the automated agent may provide various links to fill out online forms or use other web resources”).
Regarding claim(s) 10-18 and 19-20, do(es) not teach or further define over the limitation in claim(s) 1-9 and 1-2 respectively. Therefore claim(s) 10-18 and 19-20, is/are rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in claim(s) 1-9 and 1-2 respectively.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
For the reason above, claims 1-20 have been rejected and remain pending.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY H TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5638. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm PST.
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, Chris Parry can be reached at 571-272-8328. 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.
JIMMY H TRAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2451
/JIMMY H TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights