DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The instant application having Application No. 18/836,569 has a total of 20 claims pending in the application, there are 3 independent claims and 17 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner.
Oath/Declaration
The applicant’s oath/declaration has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Specification
The applicant’s specification submitted is acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. This claim is an omnibus type claim. The limitation beginning with “optionally” is not clear in regards to whether the steps are included as a response or not after an affirmative step previous to it. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-4, 6, 9-12 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being drawn to non-statutory subject matter.
The independent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is drawn to an abstract idea without significantly more. Independent claims 1 and 23 are drawn to acquiring search results in response to content and displaying snippet information from the results. The displaying of search result information could have been accomplished through human mental process, and addition of a system with memory and processors, hold as abstract, thus the limitations don’t describe doing significantly more, and the claims as a whole does not provide integration into a practical application.
The claims fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Specifically, the limitations as discussed above, as claimed, is a process that covers performance of the limitations in the mind, or with pen and paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components (e.g., computer, storage device) because a user can mentally, or with pen and paper, observe, evaluate and make judgements to perform the claimed limitations. For example, a person can read documents and make judgements to find sections of documents that contain a problem, and provide a report with any findings. A person can further link substantially identical concepts mentally or via taking notes on paper.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites additional elements (e.g., computer, storage device) that are recited at a high-level of generality (e.g., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. See 2106.05(d)(Il). Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 2-4, 6, 9-12 and 23-24 recite generic steps of displaying snippet information from search results, targeting a number of the pictures, displaying the images at certain positions, displaying sub-snippets in a style and displaying detailed content related to snippet, with only basic elements stated that can be accomplished through mental processes without significantly more elements.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component is not significantly more than the judicial exception.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 11, 13-15, 17, 23-24 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over Denninghoff et al. (US 2022/0121715 A1).
For claim 1, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
A search result display method, comprising: acquiring a first search result in response to search content [search result with search content, 0157: Denninghoff]; and displaying snippet information corresponding to the first search result on a search result page [displaying snippet results on result page, 0487: Denninghoff], wherein: the snippet information is generated based on detailed content and a snippet attribute of the first search result [snippets based on attributes of search results, 0487: Denninghoff]; the snippet attribute comprises at least one of a snippet line number, a snippet area size or snippet typesetting information [snippet with text attribute customization, 0377: Denninghoff]; and the snippet attribute is determined based on key content matching the search content in the detailed content [snippet attribute information taken from the document body of the search results, 0487: Denninghoff].
For claim 2, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
The search result display method according to claim 1, wherein the displaying snippet information corresponding to the first search result on a search result page comprises: displaying the snippet information in a target style on the search result page, wherein the target style matches the snippet attribute [search results presented in a particular individualized style, 0566-0567: Denninghoff].
For claim 3, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
The search result display method according to claim 2, wherein: the displaying the snippet information in a target style on the search result page comprises displaying an all-snippet viewing control at a display position of the snippet information in response to complete snippet content of the snippet information exceeding the snippet line number and/or the snippet area size; and the method further comprises after the displaying the snippet information in a target style on the search result page, displaying the complete snippet content at a first preset position on the search result page in response to a trigger operation on the all-snippet viewing control.
For claim 11, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
The search result display method according to claim 2, wherein the displaying the snippet information in a target style on the search result page comprises: displaying a plurality of sub-snippets in a display style that slides along a second preset direction to switch on the search result page, wherein the sub-snippet contains a key picture in a second search result associated with the first search result and/or a key text matching the search content [highlighting section of the document snippet, 1027-1029 and claim 3: Denninghoff].
For claim 13, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
The search result display method according to claim 1, wherein the snippet attribute is determined based on a comprehensive quality index value corresponding to the key content and a content length of the key content, wherein the comprehensive quality index value is configured to characterize a satisfaction degree of the first search result to search requirements [a quality index to meet requirements of matching, 0740: Denninghoff].
For claim 14, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
A snippet information generation method, comprising: acquiring a first search result corresponding to search content [search result with search content, 0157: Denninghoff]; determining a target snippet attribute of the first search result based on key content of the first search result, wherein: the target snippet attribute comprises at least one of a snippet line number, a snippet area size or snippet typesetting information, and the key content is content matching the search content in detailed content of the first search result [snippet with text attribute customization, 0377: Denninghoff]; and performing information processing on the detailed content based on the target snippet attribute to generate snippet information corresponding to the first search result [snippet attribute information taken from the document body of the search results, 0487: Denninghoff].
For claim 15, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
The snippet information generation method according to claim 14, wherein the determining a target snippet attribute of the first search result based on key content of the first search result comprises: adjusting a basic snippet attribute based on a comprehensive quality index value corresponding to the key content and a content length of the key content to generate the target snippet attribute [matching snippets based on quality, 0085: Denninghoff], wherein the comprehensive quality index value is configured to characterize a satisfaction degree of the first search result to search requirements [a quality index to meet requirements of matching, 0740: Denninghoff].
For claim 17, Denninghoff et al. teaches:
The snippet information generation method according to claim 15, wherein the comprehensive quality index value includes ranking position, content quality, relevance to the search content and timeliness [ranking by relevance, 0503: Denninghoff], wherein the content quality is configured to characterize a quality of the detailed content, and the timeliness is configured to characterize a difference between a release time of the first search result and a current time [activation record for time, 0499; a quality index to meet requirements of matching, 0740: Denninghoff].
Claim 23 is a device of the method taught by claim 1. Denninghoff et al. teaches the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 24 is a medium of the method taught by claim 1. Denninghoff et al. teaches the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 26 is a device of the method taught by claim 14. Denninghoff et al. teaches the limitations of claim 14 for the reasons stated above.
Claim 27 is a medium of the method taught by claim 14. Denninghoff et al. teaches the limitations of claim 14 for the reasons stated above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is in condition for allowance.
For claim 16, Denninghoff et al. (US 2022/0121715 A1) teaches acquiring a response to search and displaying content and snippets of the results, but does not teach adjusting a basic snippet attribute based on a comprehensive quality index value corresponding to the key content and a content length of the key content to generate the target snippet attribute comprises at least one of the following: in response to determining that the content length is greater than or equal to a preset length threshold, and the comprehensive quality index value is greater than or equal to a preset quality threshold, increasing the basic snippet attribute based on a difference between the comprehensive quality index value and the preset quality threshold, a difference between the content length and the preset length threshold and a snippet attribute threshold to generate the target snippet attribute; in response to determining that the content length is less than the preset length threshold, reducing the basic snippet attribute based on the content length to generate the target snippet attribute; or in response to determining that the comprehensive quality index value is less than the preset quality threshold, determining the basic snippet attribute as the target snippet attribute, or reducing the basic snippet attribute to generate the target snippet attribute.
Conclusion
The Examiner requests, in response to this Office action, that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the Examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this Office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AJITH M JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-1763. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday: Flexible Hours.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Apu Mofiz can be reached on 571-272-4080. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AJITH JACOB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2161
4/18/2026
Prosecution Insights