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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: on line 6 of claim 4, the texts appear to include typographical error. 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 20 reciting a method to be performed by an information processing device comprising a data processing unit for “executing at least one of recognition of an episode or recognition of a relationship between a plurality of the episodes, on a basis of a plurality of user utterances issued by a user”., is, under its broadest reasonable interpretation directed to claims describing a series of mental processes that can be practically considered to be performed in a human mind.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because other than stating that the method is performed by an information processing device, the claim does not include any limitation tying the abstract idea to a hardware/software that is specific to the subject matters of the claim.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claim does not include any limitation or element other that the one found to be abstract idea.
Claim 1 is analogous to claim 20, thus rejected for same reason.
Claims 2-19, are directed to further describing a plurality of functions performed by the data processing unit and a data management unit, however, they do not include additional limitation or element that integrates the abstract idea to a practical application.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to
fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ASUKAI (USPG 2019/0163961 now US 11003894).
As to claim 1, ASUKAI teaches an information processing device 1 comprising: a data processing unit Fig.2, 10 configured to execute at least one of recognition of an episode Fig.1, S262-274 or recognition of a relationship between a plurality of the episodes, on a basis of a plurality of user utterances S256 issued by a user (Pars.11-126)
PNG
media_image1.png
694
432
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 2, ASUKAI teaches wherein the data processing unit controls output of a system utterance to the user (Fig.2, 10).
As to claim 3, ASUKAI teaches wherein the data processing unit controls output of the system utterance so as to prompt the user to issue, among the user utterances, a user utterance including information necessary for at least one of recognition of the episode or recognition of a relationship between a plurality of the episodes (Figs.1, 4-5; Fig.9, S221-S227).
As to claim 4, ASUKAI teaches wherein the data processing unit controls output of the system utterance so as to prompt the user to issue, among the user utterances, a user utterance including missing information in the episode that has been recognized (Pars.36, 65-66, 108-117; Figs.1, 9, 13).
As to claim 5, ASUKA teaches wherein the data processing unit estimates a detail of the episode on a basis of a user utterance issued by the user at this time among the user utterances and knowledge acquired from a user utterance in past among the user utterances (Pars.124, 181-185; Fig.14)
As to claim 6, ASUKA teaches wherein the data processing unit controls output of the system utterance on a basis of a result of estimating a detail of the episode (Pars.105-107, 128-135)
As to claim 7, ASUKA teaches a data management unit configured to manage data to be used for the system utterance (Fig.3, 20, Fig.16).
As to claim 8, ASUKA teaches wherein the data management unit extracts knowledge to be used for the system utterance from knowledge regarding a predetermined theme, the knowledge being input by a plurality of users (Figs.1, 4-7, 12).
As to claim 9, ASUKA teaches wherein the data processing unit analyzes an event S256 including an interaction with the user, and the data management unit extracts knowledge to be used for the system utterance on a basis of a result of analyzing the event (Fig.16, 310-308; Pars.208-238).
As to claim 10, ASUKA teaches wherein in a case where an unknown word is included in each of the user utterances, the data management unit collects information regarding the unknown word, and the data processing unit controls output of the system utterance on a basis of a result of collecting information regarding the unknown word (Fig.1; Pars.181-189).
As to claim 11, ASUKA teaches wherein in a case where the unknown word is included in, among the user utterances, a user utterance including an answer to a question included in the system utterance, the data management unit investigates information regarding the unknown word (Figs.1, 4-5, 12).
As to claim 12, ASUKA teaches wherein the data management unit extracts a keyword indicating a preference of the user from each of the user utterances, and generates keyword information that is information indicating a relationship between the extracted keywords (Figs.5, 7, 12).
As to claim 13, ASUKA teaches wherein the data processing unit controls output of the system utterance to the user on a basis of the keyword information (Abstract; Pars.181-208).
As to ASUKA teaches wherein the data processing unit analyzes an event including an interaction with the user, and generates information regarding a memory with the user on a basis of a result of analyzing the event (Figs.4-10).
As to claim 17, ASUKA teaches wherein the data processing unit controls output of the system utterance of an interaction robot (Fig.1)
As to claim 18, ASUKA teaches wherein the data processing unit recognizes the episode in more detail on a basis of a user utterance issued by the user at this time among the user utterances and the episode recognized from a user utterance issued by the user in past among the user utterances (Pars.124, 181-185; Figs.12, 14)
As to claim 19, Asuka teaches wherein the data processing unit controls output of information indicating a process of executing at least one of recognition of the episode or recognition of a relationship between a plurality of the episodes, on a basis of a plurality of the user utterances (Figs.10, 12).
As to claim 20, the corresponding method comprising the steps of claim 1 is analogous therefore rejected as being anticipated by ASUKA for the foregoing reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 14 is allowed because ASUKA doesn’t teach wherein the data management unit collects information regarding a predetermined investigation target from another user, and the data processing unit controls output of the system utterance to the user on a basis of information collected from the another user.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. IKENO et al. (US 2018/0090132).
IKENO teaches an information processing device configured to execute at least one of recognition of an episode/scenario or recognition of a relationship between a plurality of the scenarios on a basis of a plurality of user utterances (Figs.3-5; Abstract; Pars.47-50).
PNG
media_image2.png
464
692
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL DEMELASH ABEBE whose telephone number is (571)272-7615. The examiner can normally be reached monday-friday 7-4.
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, Daniel Washburn can be reached at 571-272-5551. 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 ABEBE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2657
Prosecution Insights