DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant's Communication received 10/01/2024 for 18903039. Claims 1-20 are presented.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/11/2025 was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the "an RCSP2A provider" (claims 7, 16); "a RBM platform provider", "RBM agents" (claims 8, 17); "a carrier", "a carrier's network" (claims 9, 18); "a RBM platform provider" (claims 10, 19); "a different platform (claims 11, 20); "another messaging-as-a-platform", "a RBM platform", and "a partner platform" (claim 12) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The use of the terms android, iPhone, iOS, messages, Google Play, Google Jibe, which are trade names or marks used in commerce, have been noted in this application. The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the terms should be capitalized wherever they appear or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM, or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code. Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 13 recite the term "an htttp: URI" which appears to include a typo and has been interpreted as "an [[htttp:]] --http:-- URI".
Claims 1 and 13 recite the term "the users" which lacks antecedent basis and has been interpreted as "[[the]] users".
Claims 2-4 recite the term "the form" which lacks antecedent basis and has been interpreted as "[[the]] --a-- form".
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 are 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 regards as the invention.
As to claims 1-3, 5, and 13-14, the use of the terms android, iPhone, iOS, messages, Google Play, Google Jibe, which are trade names or marks used in commerce, have been noted in this application. The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to describe any particular material or product. Thus, the use of a trademark or trade name in a claim to describe a material or product would not only render a claim indefinite, but would also constitute an improper use of the trademark or trade name.
Claims 1 and 13 recite “the user device” which is unclear if the “user device” refers to the “user device with other operating system (OS) that supports the rich communication service (RCS)” or the “user device does not support the RCS” as recited in the instant claim.
Claim 2 recites the term "the android users" which is unclear if the "android users" refers to the "android user" recited in parent claim 1 or another set of "android users" as recited in the instant claim.
Claim 3 recites the term "the iOS users" which is unclear if the "iOS users" refers to the "iOS user" recited in parent claim 1 or another set of "iOS users" as recited in the instant claim.
Claim 3 recites the term "the users of the user device" which is unclear if the "users of the user device" refers to the "user" of a user device recited in parent claim 1, the "users on other devices" as recited in parent claim 1, or another set of "users" of the user device as recited in parent claim 1.
Claim 4 recites the term "the users on other user devices" which is unclear if the "users" and "other devices" refer to "the users on other devices" as recited in parent claim 1 or another set of users on another set of user devices.
Claims 5 and 14 recite the term "the users" which is unclear if "the users" refer solely to "the users on other devices" as recited in parent claim 1 or other general users.
Claims 5 and 14 recite the term "the user device" which is unclear if the "user device" refers to each individual user device of "the users" as recited in the instant claim, the "user device with other operating system (OS) that supports the rich communication services (RCS)" as recited in parent claim 1, the "user device does not support the RCS" as recited in parent claim 1, or another user device.
Dependent claims 2-12 and 14-20 are rejected as being indefinite for failing to remedy the deficiencies of parent claims 1 and 13.
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 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(s) 1 and 5-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stafford et al. (US 20230188485 A1) in view of Jernstrom (US 20190356704 A1) and Mumick et al. (US 20210359991 A1).
As to claim 1, Stafford discloses a method for accessing a rich communication services (RCS) Business Messaging (RBM) agent, the method employing a rich communication services person-to-application (RCSP2A) [para 0194-0195, 0212, RCS message application enables rich communications messages between user and chat bot (read: agent) application], executable by at least one processor configured to execute computer program instructions for performing the method [para 0200, device includes processing unit executing stored instructions], comprising:
receiving RBM agent information, by the RCSP2A … [para 0219, 0221, 0223-0225, RCS message application provides electronic link (read: RBM agent information) for chat bot application];
creating, by the RCSP2A, a person-to-application (P2A) deep-link for the RBM agent [para 0200, 0223-0225, RCS message application modifies message to include electronic deep link connecting user to message application], wherein the P2A deep-link is created using one of:
an htttp: URI for the users on other devices that do not support the RCS [para 0200, 0223-0225, modified message for target device that cannot receive RCS messages includes electronic deep link using uniform resource locator, note strikethrough indicates non-selected alternatives];
transmitting, by the RCSP2A, the created P2A deep-link to a user [para 0200, RCS message application sends modified message including electronic link to target device]; and
upon clicking, by the user, the P2A deep-link [para 0200, 0217, activate link with manual click selection input]:
(a) if the user is the android user with a RCS enabled device:
initiating a chat with the RBM agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the intent: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, wherein the user can one of start chatting or resume chatting with the rich communication services (RCS) business messaging (RBM);
(b) if the user is the android user with a messages client installed on an android device, wherein the RCS is not enabled for the messages client:
opening the messages client, with instructions to turn on rich communication services chat for the messages client; and
upon the user enabling the rich communication services chat for the messages client, initiating a chat with the RBM Agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the intent: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, and enabling the user to one of start chatting or resume chatting with the RBM agent;
(c) if the user is the android user with the messages client not installed on the android device:
opening a first web page specified by the fallback URL in the intent: URI and providing instructions to the user to:
i. click on a link to Google Play store to install the messages client;
ii. turn on rich communication services chat features; and
iii. click the P2A deep-link created using the intent: URI;
upon the user enabling the rich communication services chat for the messages client, initiating a chat with the RBM Agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the intent: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, and enabling the user to one of start chatting or resume chatting with the RBM agent;
(d) if the user is the iOS user or the user of the user device with other OS that supports the RCS:
initiating a chat with the RBM Agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the sms: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, wherein the user can one of start chatting or resume chatting with the RBM agent and
(e) if a user device does not support the RCS [para 0209, 0219, send modified message to device that cannot receive RCS message]:
displaying a second web page specified by the http: URI to the user… [para 0209, 0219, 0221, 0223-0227, electronic link provides application by web browser through deep link to website content page through URL].
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus claim scope does not require the contingent limitation steps of "initiating []; opening []; and … initiating []; opening []; … initiating []", and "initiating []" to be performed if the precedent conditions "(a) if the user is the android user with a RCS enabled device", "(b) if the user is the android user with a messages client installed on an android device, wherein the RCS is not enabled for the messages client", "(c) if the user is the android user with the messages client not installed on the android device", or "(d) if the user is the iOS user or the user of the user device with other OS that supports the RCS" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
However, Stafford does not specifically disclose wherein the received RBM Agent information comprises a chatbot_service_id, a chatbot_name, and a trigger_keyword of the RBM agent.
Jernstrom discloses wherein the received RBM Agent information comprises a chatbot_service_id, a chatbot_name, and a trigger_keyword of the RBM agent [para 0033-0037, 0040-0041, user establishes session with chatbot agent (read: RBM agent) using input including user-specific identity (read: chatbot_service_id), chatbot agent name, and confirmation wording (read: trigger_keyword) for chatbot agent].
Stafford and Jernstrom are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of network communication devices. 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 received RBM agent information as disclosed by Stafford with the agent information as disclosed by Jernstrom with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Stafford as described above to confirm user access to operator features [Jernstrom, para 0041].
However, Stafford and Jernstrom do not specifically disclose notifying the user that the RCS is not supported on the user device.
Mumick discloses notifying the user that the RCS is not supported on the user device [para 0032, 0048, 0062, display standard message if user is not enabled for rich messaging platform].
Stafford, Jernstrom, and Mumick are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of network communication devices. 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 displayed web page as disclosed by Stafford and Jernstrom with notifying the user that the RCS is not supported on the user device as disclosed by Mumick with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Stafford and Jernstrom as described above to increase reliable message delivery [Mumick, para 0039].
As to claim 5, Stafford discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the users are redirected to different URIs based on their user device, country, and carrier, wherein the user device comprises Android, iOS, or other user devices [para 0161, 0194, 0223-0225, 0269-0272, provide links modified for devices using operating system between carriers and specified country].
As to claim 6, Stafford discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the RCSP2A creates [] code [] corresponding to the P2A deep-link for the RBM agent [para 0223-0225, RCS message application modifies message to include index (read: code) of electronic deep link].
However, Stafford does not specifically disclose a quick-response (QR) code (QR Code), and wherein the user can scan the QR Code to access the P2A deep-link to the RBM agent.
Jernstrom discloses:
a quick-response (QR) code (QR Code) corresponding to the P2A deep-link for the RBM agent [para 0033-0034, QR code establishes connection between chatbot agent (read: RBM agent) and user (read: P2A deep-link)], and
wherein the user can scan the QR Code to access the P2A deep-link to the RBM agent [para 0033, user scans QR code, note the limitation "to access the P2A deep-link to the RBM agent" is not being given patentable weight as the term "to" suggests or makes optional and does not require the step to be performed as the limitation is an intended result of the "QR code" as recited in the claim (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note user scans QR code link to establishes session between chatbot agent and user].
Stafford and Jernstrom are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of network communication devices. 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 created code as disclosed by Stafford with the QR code as disclosed by Jernstrom with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Stafford as described above to utilize known communication channels [see examples of communication channels in Stafford (para 0223) and Jernstrom (para 0033)].
As to claim 7, Stafford discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the P2A deep-link is provided as a service to brands and/or developers by an RCSP2A provider [Fig. 4, para 0165, 0194-0195, 0221-0229, application offers service sending link to business brands through platform service (read: RCSP2A provider) for RCS interoperability between user and business chat bot].
As to claim 8, Stafford discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the RCSP2A provider is also a RBM platform provider for the brands and/or the developers to onboard and launch multiple RBM agents [Fig. 4, para 0165, 0212, 0221-0229, platform service (read: RBM platform provider) offers RCS interoperability service to business brands, note the limitation "to onboard and launch multiple RBM agents" is not being given patentable weight as the term "to" suggests or makes optional and does not require the step to be performed as the limitation is an intended result of the "RBM platform provider" as recited in the claim (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note RCS interoperability service offered for messaging business bots (read: RBM agents)].
As to claim 9, Stafford discloses the method of claim 8, wherein a carrier partners with the RCSP2A provider to offer the P2A deep-link service for the multiple RBM agents launched on a carrier’s network [para 0194-0195, 0221-0229, computing network (read: carrier network) connects platform application service to carrier user phones and business chat bots, note the limitation "to offer the P2A deep-link service for the multiple RBM agents launched on a carrier’s network" is not being given patentable weight as the term "to" suggests or makes optional and does not require the step to be performed as the limitation is an intended result of the "carrier" as recited in the claim (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note network connects platform application service sending links providing RCS functionality between carrier user phones and business chat bots].
As to claim 10, Stafford discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the RCSP2A provider is also a RBM platform provider for the brands and/or the developers to onboard and launch the multiple RBM agents on the carrier’s network [Fig. 4, para 0165, 0194-0195, 0212, 0221-0229, platform service (read: RBM platform provider) offers RCS interoperability service to business brands, note the limitation "to onboard and launch the multiple RBM agents on the carrier’s network" is not being given patentable weight as the term "to" suggests or makes optional and does not require the step to be performed as the limitation is an intended result of the "RBM platform provider" as recited in the claim (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note RCS interoperability service sends links through computer network between carrier phones and business chat bots].
As to claim 11, Stafford discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the carrier uses a different platform for onboarding and launching the multiple RBM agents on the carrier’s network [Figs. 1, 4, para 0064-0065, 0165, 0194-0195, 0212, 0221-0229, network includes separate platform services, note the limitation "for onboarding and launching the multiple RBM agents on the carrier’s network" is not being given patentable weight as the term "for" suggests or makes optional and does not require the step to be performed as the limitation is an intended result of the "different platform" as recited in the claim (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note separate platform service elements offer RCS interoperability service sending links through computer network between carrier phones and business branded chat bots].
As to claim 12, Stafford discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the RCSP2A provider partners with one of [Figs. 1, 4, para 0064-0065, 0165, 0194-0195, 0212, 0221-0229, network connects platform service to another platform service, note the limitation "to provide the P2A deep-link service for some or all of the multiple RBM agents launched on a partner platform" is not being given patentable weight as the term "to" suggests or makes optional and does not require the step to be performed as the limitation is an intended result of the "RBM platform" as recited in the claim (see MPEP 2111.04), nevertheless note network connects separate platform service elements to application service sending links offering RCS interoperability service to business brands].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. The Examiner has carefully examined independent claim 13. The closest prior art references of record are noted below.
Abdelmalek et al. (US 20210105236 A1) generally discloses transmitting a query to converse with a virtual assistant and communicating with the virtual assistant via an RCS communication session.
Mumick et al. (US 11924718 B2), disclosed less than one year before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by the same assignee, generally discloses creating and transmitting a rich message based on a mobile number is enabled for receiving rich messages.
Mumick et al. (US 12167302 B2), disclosed less than one year before the effective filing date of the claimed invention by the same assignee, generally discloses transmitting a short message service message or rich communication service message based on determining whether rich messaging channels is enabled on a user device.
Lachwani et al. (US 20170024199 A1) generally discloses transmitting links used to initiate installation of an application not installed on a computing device through an application store.
Shankar et al. (US 20220368593 A1) generally discloses generating unique links including deep link and fallback experiences given device types.
Applicant's claims have been considered in view of the cited art. After reviewing the art and performing a search, no combination of prior art reads on the claim as a whole. Specifically, the limitations in combination make the independent claims as a whole novel and non-obvious over the prior art. In addition, no reference uncovered would have provided a basis of evidence for asserting a motivation, nor one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made, knowing the teaching of the prior arts of record would have combined them to arrive at the present invention as recited in the context of the independent claims as a whole.
Regarding the claims, the prior art of record broadly discloses rich communication services business messaging systems. Moreover, the prior art of record allows messaging between person to application, creating deep links for the RBM agent, and establishing different communication channels based on determining user device types and whether RCS has been enabled for the user device.
However, the prior art of record does not explicitly teach the more intertwined nature of the current claims. The RBM agent information and created person-to-application (P2A) deep-link are specifically being claimed and how the P2A deep link utilizes the received RBM agent information is not taught by the prior art, specifically, (a) if the user is the android user with a RCS enabled device: initiate a chat with the RBM Agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the intent: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, wherein the user can one of start chatting or resume chatting with the rich communication services (RCS) business messaging (RBM) agent; (b) if the user is the android user with a messages client installed on an android device, wherein the RCS is not enabled for the messages client: open the messages client, with instructions to turn on rich communication services chat for the messages client; and upon the user enabling the rich communication services chat for the messages client, initiate a chat with the RBM Agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the intent: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, and enable the user to one of start chatting or resume chatting with the RBM agent; (c) if the user is the android user with the messages client not installed on the android device: open a first web page specified by the fallback URL in the intent: URI and provide instructions to the user to: i. click on a link to Google Play store to install the messages client; ii. turn on rich communication services chat features; and iii. click the P2A deep-link created using the intent: URI; upon the user enabling the rich communication services chat for the messages client, initiate a chat with the RBM Agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the intent: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, and enable the user to one of start chatting or resume chatting with the RBM agent; (d) if the user is the iOS user or the user of the user device with another OS that supports the RCS: initiate a chat with the RBM Agent specified by the chatbot_service_id and the chatbot_name in the sms: URI, with the trigger_keyword pre-populated, wherein the user can one of start chatting or resume chatting with the RBM agent; and (e) if a user device does not support the RCS: display a second web page specified by the http: URI to the user, and notify the user that the RCS is not supported on the user device.
Allowing such person-to-application deep-links to initiate chats with a rich business messaging agent is not taught by the previously cited art. Moreover, the initiated chats as well as the specific usage of the rich business messaging agent associated therewith fully integrate any type of high level data input and data output into a practical application. Therefore, it is for at least these reasons that the claim language, in the specific order recited, defines patentability over the prior art of record.
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