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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 21-40 are pending. Claims 21 and 31 are independent. Claims 1-20 were canceled by a preliminary amendment and 21-40 added.
This Application is published as US 20250149028.
Apparent priority: 10 December 2021.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application No. 17/547,947 issued as U.S. 12159628. A Terminal Disclaimer over the term of the parent is required.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
This Application is a continuation of an earlier parent application.
The following terms are occurring in the new set of Claim that do not have an antecedent basis in the Specification.
30. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising: processing the first website data to determine semantic data corresponding to at least the first action, wherein configuration of the first system component uses the semantic data.
“Semantic Data” does not appear in the Specification. The Specification refers to “Semantic Action Data 1102.” Please keep the key terminology of the Claim consistent with that of the Specification.
Claim 40 has language similar to Claim 30 which also lacks antecedent basis in the Specification.
29. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising: processing the first website data to determine web elements mapping data representing a relationship of the at least one web element to at least one second web element, wherein configuration of the first system component uses the web elements mapping data.
“Web elements mapping data” has no antecedent basis in the Specification. The Specification refers to “[0013] FIG. 10 is a conceptual diagram illustrating a web elements mapping component, according to embodiments of the present disclosure.” “[0052] … Such navigation sequence may indicate web actions (e.g., click, select, type, etc.) to be performed, web elements to be interacted with (e.g., button, drop down list, web page, text field, etc.) ….” “[0142] … The bounding box detection component 710, the web element classification component 720 and the web elements mapping component 730 may be configured to find bounding boxes within the webpage and align the bounding boxes to website actions (e.g., click, select, enter, etc.) and entities corresponding to the domain and stored in the domain settings storage 640.” “[0148] FIG. 10 illustrates the web elements mapping component 730. The web elements mapping component 730 may be configured to align the identified bounding boxes, represented in the predicted boxes data 712, to web elements represented in a Document Object Model (DOM) tree 1002 for the website 604a….”
Claim 39 has language similar to Claim 29 which also lacks antecedent basis in the Specification.
When available in the Specification, use the verbatim terminology from the Specification please.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 12159628 as shown below. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following mapping:
Instant Application
U.S. 12159628
21. (New) A computer-implemented method, comprising:
accessing a first website to determine first website data corresponding to the first website, the first website data indicating at least one web element operable to perform a first action using the first website;
processing the first website data to configure a first system component to, in response to a user input, interact with the first website data to provide a response to the user input;
after configuration of the first system component, receiving first input data corresponding to a first natural language input;
processing the first input data to determine the first natural language input corresponds to execution of the first action using the first website;
performing processing using the first system component to determine execution of the first action requires first information;
determining first output data representing a request for input of the first information;
causing presentation of the request using the first output data;
receiving second input data;
processing the second input data to determine a first value for the first information;
after determination of the first information, accessing the first website to provide the first value and cause execution of the first action;
after providing the first value, receiving, from the first website, second output data representing a result of the first action; and
sending the second output data to a user device to cause presentation of information related to the result.
1. A computer-implemented method comprising:
(the “browser application” of this claim corresponds to the “website data” of Claim 21.
The first two limitations of Claim 21 defines a website that can take input from a user to perform a task which is the basis of claim 1 of the Reference as well.)
receiving first input data representing a first natural language input, the first input data associated with a first dialog session identifier for a first dialog session;
determining, using the first input data, that the first natural language input corresponds to a first action to be performed;
determining that first configuration data is associated with performance of the first action by a first application,
the first configuration data identifying at least a first operation and a second operation that are to be performed by a browser application to cause the first application to perform the first action,
the first operation corresponding to a first interface element presented by the browser application and the second operation corresponding to a second interface element presented by the browser application,
wherein the first interface element is presented by the browser application based on first data received from the first application, and
wherein performance of the first operation and the second operation causes third data to be sent to the first application to cause the first application to perform the first action;
causing, based at least in part on the first natural language input corresponding to the first action and the first configuration data being associated with the performance of the first action by the first application, the browser application to perform at least the first operation and the second operation to cause the third data to be sent to the first application;
receiving, from the first application, first response data corresponding to performance of the first action;
determining first output data based at least in part on the first response data; and
causing a device to present the first output data in response to the first natural language input.
23. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising, prior to receiving the first input data:
accessing a second website to determine second website data corresponding to the second website, the second website data indicating at least one second web element operable to perform a second action using the second website; and
processing the second website data to further configure the first system component.
The remaining Claims 22 and 24-30 depend from Claim 21 and are rejected under the combination of claim 1 of the reference and the 35 U.S.C. 103 references applied to each dependent Claim below under the rationale provided in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections below.
Claim 31 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 21 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 32 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 22 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 33 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 23 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 34 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 24 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 35 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 25 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 36 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 26 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 37 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 27 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 38 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 28 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 39 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 29 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 40 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 30 and is rejected under similar rationale.
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.
Claims 21-22, 24-26, 29-30, 31-32, 34-36 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pujari (U.S. 20190278563).
Please refer to the reasons for allowance of the parent application.
The following Claims have been broadened to the level of a simple IVR that interacts with a single website.
Pujari is directed to an “INTERACTIVE VOICE RESPONSE INTERFACE FOR WEBPAGE NAVIGATION” (Title). Pujari teaches that execution of a command depends on execution of a sequence of instructions: “[0012] The IVR interface may be constructed by defining custom HTML (or other webpage) tags for fields and/or elements on the webpage. Thus, the custom HTML tags may correspond to a flow of information in the IVR system interface and include sequencing numbers corresponding to the flow. …” “[0020] IVR flow may correspond to a sequencing of webpage elements that include information presented on a webpage as well as fields of the webpage that may accept input and/or website navigation instructions (e.g., a clickable button that navigates to other webpages throughout a website)….” Pujari’s interface provides a means for entry of commands to the user so that the Paypal application can perform the actions requested by the user.
Pujari presents a number of UI elements to the user in sequence, each element is going to require its own input and a single input is not going to result in activation of a number of UI elements. However, the following Claims no longer require that. The “second website” which would be the inventive website of the instant Application (and by the way is used first, as indicated in Claim 23) enters in Claim 23 and is present only in Claim 23. The rest of the Claims deal with only one website.
Regarding Claim 21, Pujari teaches:
21. A computer-implemented method, comprising:
accessing a first website to determine first website data corresponding to the first website, the first website data indicating at least one web element operable to perform a first action using the first website; [Pujari, Figure 1, the “user device 110” is in communication with the “website server 130” that includes “website hosting application 132.” Figure 2A show the “user device 210” opening the “Browser Application Interface 212” which includes a “web page 260” with several “web elements” including “selected element 266a” that can be used to perform the “first action” such as transferring an amount of money. “[0018] Browser application 112 may be used, for example, to provide a convenient interface to permit a user to browse information available over network 140 including accessing webpages, entering information from webpages, and navigating websites through webpages. In certain embodiments, browser application 112 may be implemented as a web browser configured to view information available over the Internet or access a website of a website provider, such as website server 130. For example, browser application 112 may be utilized to access websites and engage in online actions with website server 130, including viewing information provided on the webpages, entering information to the webpages, and navigating through the website….” “[0030] … The IVR like interface may walk user 102 through the webpage elements, such as by playing a voice message for each webpage element that includes an input that may select, change, and/or navigate through the webpage element.” All of the selection, change, navigation, and entry of the requested data are the various inputs that occur in a sequence. This Claim breaks down the steps to selection of a UI element, then entry of the information, then processing the information by the system, then use of the information. All the detailed steps are directed to simple steps of using a single website to perform a task.]
processing the first website data to configure a first system component to, in response to a user input, interact with the first website data to provide a response to the user input; [Pujari, Figures 2A and 2B show how the “web page 260” which is based on and configured by the “website data” is providing a response via the IVR to the user input. “First system component” is the UI/GUI element such as “element 266a” that is generated to interact with the user. First the user has to select one of the services shown in Figure 1 each of which has its own website and configure the website to present UI or GUI elements to the user. “[0014] System 100 includes a user 102, a user device 110, an IVR server 120, and a website server 130 in communication directly and/or over a network 140. IVR server 120 may establish an. IVR flow for the webpage and define IVR flow information using either custom HTML tags on fields in the webpage or through a separate file/database which maintains IVR flow information as links to the fields in the webpage. Once IVR flow information is determined, a software component library may be generated that interprets the IVR flow information and loads voice messages corresponding to the fields from the IVR flow information. User 102 may utilize user device 110 to access a webpage of website server 130 and received the software component library. Thus, user 102 may hear the voice messages and input data/information to the webpage through the messages when user 102 initiates the software component library. Thus, user 102 may navigate webpages of website server 130 using the IVR interface provided by IVR server 120.” ]
after configuration of the first system component, receiving first input data corresponding to a first natural language input; [Pujari, the “first input data” is taught by the natural language input response to the IVR message 270. After the user selects GUI element 266a / “first system component,” the web page receives asks the user to enter the amount of $ for transfer which teaches the “first input data corresponding to a first natural language input.” A different response is shown in Figure 2B in response to a next user input.] (The Claims are written to double up an entry: as both “data” and then the “input.” These are the same thing: data that represents an input/entry.)
processing the first input data to determine the first natural language input corresponds to execution of the first action using the first website; [Pujari, Figure 2B, the input of “first input data” / “2000$” is processed by speech recognition and natural language processing to determine that it corresponds to the execution of the “first action” which is transferring money by the “web page 260” / “first website”. This Claim breaks down the steps very finely.]
performing processing using the first system component to determine execution of the first action requires first information; [Pujari, Figure 2A, the execution of the first action / money transfer requires more information which would be either the amount or the recipient or any next piece of data that the software needs to execute the task / “first information” of the Claim. The “first system components” is the component handling the Paypal operations in the case of Pujari.]
determining first output data representing a request for input of the first information; [Pujari, Figures 2A and 2B, 270a and 270b are “first output data” that represent a request for further information / “first information” that is required by the software to move forward. 270a asks the user to enter the amount and 270b asks the user to say next to make the transfer happen or asks for more information such as the recipient. Both “next” and “recipient id” teach the “first information” of the Claim.]
causing presentation of the request using the first output data; [Pujari, Figures 2A and 2B, the “first output data” which is the request is being presented using the IVR messages 270a, 270b. “[0047] FIG. 2B shows webpage 260 as a user navigates through webpage 260 using the IVR interface provided through IVR messages 270a of FIG. 2A and IVR message 270b in FIG. 2B. Thus, after the user hears IVR message 270a and is instructed to enter money into transfer amount 264a, the user presses return or says complete. In webpage form 262b, transfer amount 264b shows $2,000.00 after the user has stated an amount and pressed return or said complete. Thus, the IVR like interface advances selected element 266b to continue button 268 and plays IVR message 270b. IVR message 270b instructs the user to “Press return or say next to continue to providing transfer recipient information.” By pressing return or saying next, the user may select continue button 268 and advance to the next webpage of website X 250.”
receiving second input data; [Pujari, Figures 2A and 2B the input of the response to the IVR request teaches the second input data. The first input data is the response by the user to the first IVR request and the second input data is the response by the user to the second IVR request. Considering the interactive nature of IVR, this chain of request and response can continue.]
processing the second input data to determine a first value for the first information; [Pujari, each input is processed to yield the “… information” of this Claim. First input either selects the UI for the amount or provides the $2000 amount and the second request asks for the information regarding the identity of the Transfer Recipient as the “second input data”/ “first value”.]
after determination of the first information, accessing the first website to provide the first value and cause execution of the first action; [Pujari, Figure 2B, after the user inputs the “second input” resulting in the “first information” of the Claim the “execution of the first action” / transfer of the money to the recipient.]
after providing the first value, receiving, from the first website, second output data representing a result of the first action; and [Pujari‘s Figures do not show this but the goal of Pujari is to execute the transfer of a particular amount of money to a particular person and once all the required inputs are provided and the transfer/action can be executed the system comes back with the confirmation. “[0018] …. Accessible websites may include financial websites to view financial information and engage in financial transactions, messaging websites, social networking websites, and/or other online sources. Additionally, browser application 112 may access other service providers that may provide services in association with websites, such as IVR server 120.”]
sending the second output data to a user device to cause presentation of information related to the result. [Pujari, Figures 2A and 2B show the presentation of the intermediate results and the final result may be presented in a similar fashion. “[0019] Browser application 112 may receive other information than displayable webpages from IVR server 120 and/or website server 130. For example, browser application 112 may be configured to receive an interactive voice response (IVR) like interface for webpages of website server 130. Browser application 112 may receive a software component library that may read IVR flow information for a website and present the IVR flow information to user 102 through voice messages, as will be explained in more detail herein.”]
PNG
media_image1.png
674
828
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 22, Pujari teaches:
22. The computer-implemented method of claim 21,
wherein the second input data represents a second natural language input and [Pujari, Figures 2A, 2B, and 3. Pujari is an IVR system: “302: determine IVR information flow …” and IVR means that the inputs and outputs are by Voice. “[0002] The present application generally relates to an interactive voice response interface for webpage navigation and more specifically to providing interactive voice response functionality to existing webpages so a user may navigate the webpage and complete webpage forms using the interactive voice response functions.” “[0011] … The IVR system may accept vocal and/or textual inputs (e.g., a button or key selection or a voice command) for each webpage element. …”]
wherein the method further comprises performing natural language processing using the second input data to determine the first information. [Pujari, voice needs to be converted to text: “[0021] Browser application 112 may receive input for the fields in the form of text input using an attached device (e.g., keyboard, mouse, etc.). Additionally, input to the webpage may also be in the form of voice input by user 102 that may be converted to text and/or commands….”]
Regarding Claim 24, Pujari teaches:
24. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising:
receiving first content data corresponding to the first website, the first content data corresponding to interactive visual content, [Pujari, Figure 2B, the “first content data” is taught by the insertion of “$2000” by the user in the “selected element 266a” which is an “interactive visual content.”]
wherein configuration of the first system component uses the first content data. [Pujari, Figure 2B, the configuration of the “browser application interface 212” uses the “$2000” as content.]
Regarding Claim 25, Pujari teaches:
25. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein:
causing presentation of the request comprises causes presentation of the request using the user device. [Pujari, Figure 2A, 270a and Figure 2B, 270B, the user device 210 is presenting the “request” / “instruction” to the user as an IVR message.]
Regarding Claim 26, Pujari teaches:
26. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein:
the first website data further comprises image data corresponding to the first website; and [Pujari, Figure 2A and Figure 2B, showing images of the Web Page 260 which corresponds to its website.]
configuration of the first system component uses the image data. [Pujari, Figure 2A and Figure 2B are both graphic in nature and thus using “image data.”]
Regarding Claim 29, Pujari teaches:
29. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising:
processing the first website data to determine web elements mapping data representing a relationship of the at least one web element to at least one second web element, wherein configuration of the first system component uses the web elements mapping data. [Pujari uses the HTML tags of the UI elements to generate the corresponding IVR interface and therefore must be able to detect the images of the GUI elements and the HTML tag data include the relationships between the UI elements. “… The webpage includes HTML tags corresponding to elements …. The HTML tags … correspond to an IVR flow of information. The JavaScript library is built to interpret the HTML tags …so the IVR flow of information may be presented to the user….” Abstract. The IVR flow shows the relationship between the elements.]
Regarding Claim 30, Pujari teaches:
30. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising:
processing the first website data to determine semantic data corresponding to at least the first action, [Pujari, Figure 2A and Figure 2B, the information that is being entered by the user teaches the “semantic data or semantic action data” requested by the user which in this case is shown as corresponding to an action of transferring $2000.] (Note support in the Specification of the instant Application which is consistent with the mapping to Pujaro: “[0138] … In some cases, the actions derived from the natural language user inputs may be referred to as user actions or semantic actions. In some cases, the actions determined by the dialog management component 160/action selector 324 may be referred to herein as a dialog action, a user action or a semantic action, and may be similar to the actions stored in the domain settings data storage 640.” “[0150] …In the other way, the label space is a semantic action representing an action/task a user may be interested in performing, such as, check in, find locations, submit, search, etc. The web element classification component 720 may process semantic action(s) data 1102 and the predicted boxes data 712. The semantic actions data 1102 may be text data representing a list of actions, and may be predetermined based on information available for the domain corresponding to the website 604a. For example, if the domain is configured to schedule hair salon appointments, the semantic actions data 1102 may include the following actions: find salon, select service, select stylist, request appointment time, submit appointment request, etc.”)
wherein configuration of the first system component uses the semantic data. [Pujari, Figure 2A and Figure 2B, the configuration has to use the entered data in order to determine the next action such as the appropriate IVR messages 270a and 270b.]
Claim 31 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 21 and is rejected under similar rationale. Pujari, Figure 4 shows the hardware including “Memory 414” and “Processor 412” which are called for in the system Claim 31.
Claim 32 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 22 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 34 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 24 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 35 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 25 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 36 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 26 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 39 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 29 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 40 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 30 and is 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.
Claims 27-28 and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Pujari in view of Wu (U.S. 8761498).
Regarding Claim 27, Pujari uses the HTML tags of the UI elements to generate the corresponding IVR interface and therefore must be able to detect the images of the GUI elements: “… The webpage includes HTML tags corresponding to elements …. The HTML tags … correspond to an IVR flow of information. The JavaScript library is built to interpret the HTML tags …so the IVR flow of information may be presented to the user….” Abstract.
But Pujari is not express about bounding box detection.
Wu teaches:
27. The computer-implemented method of claim 26, further comprising:
processing the image data using bounding box detection to determine image feature data, wherein configuration of the first system component uses the image feature data. [Wu: “An object detector is used to determine the location and various attributes of candidate objects in the training data set. One possible attribute returned from an object detector is a detection score 408. The detection score can be a number between 0.0 and 1.0 that indicates the likelihood that the detected object is of the type of interest. A detected object is characterized by a collection of attributes. For example, a detected license plate can be described by a bounding box having Cartesian (x, y) coordinates describing its height, width, and placement within the image. Other information about the detected object could include a camera index, a viewing angle, etc.” 8:36-48. “… The system includes an object detector configured to determine a set of candidate objects in the image, a feature vector module configured to generate a set of feature vectors using the object detector to generate a feature vector for each candidate object in the set of candidate objects,…” Abstract.]
Pujari and Wu pertain to manipulation of user interfaces images including the UI elements of a website and it would have been obvious to use the image processing and image feature detection of Wu with the system of Pujari which relies on the HTML tags of the elements and does not find the image feature from the image itself as an alternative method when the HTML tag data is not available.
Regarding Claim 28, Pujari uses the HTML tags of the website files for detecting image feature data and does not mention computer vision.
Wu teaches:
28. The computer-implemented method of claim 26, further comprising:
processing the image data using computer vision processing to determine image feature data, wherein configuration of the first system component uses the image feature data. [Wu, “Object recognition in computer vision is the task of finding a given object in an image or video sequence….” 8:7-20. “FIG. 6 illustrates a computer implemented system 600 for identifying objects in a digital image, wherein the objects appear near or in a street or roadway. The input to the system 602 includes a digital image or images containing objects of interest. The objects of interest appear near or in a street or roadway. Thus, the data 602 includes a description of the street or roadway and, in particular, includes estimates of the road width. The system also includes a feature vector module 604 that generates a feature vector for features in the images 602. The feature vector module 604 may include an object detection system….” 10:1-20.]
Pujari and Wu pertain to detection of objects in images and it would have been obvious to use the computer vision detection which generates the image features instead of method used by the system of Pujari which relies on the HTML tags of the elements and does not find the image feature from the image itself as an alternative method when the HTML tag data is not available.
Claim 37 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 27 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 38 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 28 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 23 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Pujari in view of Kaplan (U.S. 20020138644).
Regarding Claim 23, Pujari teaches:
23. The computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising, prior to receiving the first input data: (“First input data” is the first input by the user into the website (first website of Claim 21) UI element.)
accessing a second website to determine second website data corresponding to the second website, the second website data indicating at least one second web element operable to perform a second action using the second website; and [Pujari, Figure 1, “Webpage IVR application 122” performs the operations that are attributed to the “second website” in this Claim. The “user device 110” accesses the “Webpage IVR application 122” and the “Webpage IVR application 122” accesses the “website hosting application 132” which teaches the “first website” of Claim 21 and reads out the elements of this “first website”/ “website hosting application 132” to the user which correspond to “second action” /IVR action using the IVR application.]
processing the second website data to further configure the first system component. (“First system element” is the website UI/GUI element that receives the user data.) [ Pujari uses an IVR Application (Figure 1, 122) to sit on top of and access another website (Figure 1, 132) (first website of Claim 21) and becomes an intermediary between the user and the website (first website) application. Thus, doing something by the IVR / “processing the second website data” configures the “first system component” /elements or icons of the “first website” of Claim 21: “There is provided systems and method for interactive voice response interface for webpage navigation. An existing webpage may be altered so that the webpage and corresponding forms offer Interactive Voice Response (IVR) to a user. A JavaScript library of other software component corresponding to the IVR interface may be downloaded to the user's system and/or browser when the user accesses the webpage. The webpage includes HTML tags corresponding to elements or a separate file/database may include links to the elements. The HTML tags and/or file/database correspond to an IVR flow of information. The JavaScript library is built to interpret the HTML tags and/or file/database so the IVR flow of information may be presented to the user. Thus, when a user engages the interactive mode, the JavaScript library may present the IVR flow to the user, interpret input from the user, and send the input to the underlying webpage.” Abstract. For the IVR of Pujari to sit on top of a website (first website of Claim 21) and provide an interface to it, Purjai has to discover the “back-end business logic that determines how data can be entered …”: “[0027] Webpage IVR application 122 may be configured to generate and provide interactive voice response (IVR) like interfaces for existing websites and webpages that do not originally provide an IVR interface. In this regard, webpage IVR application 122 may process a website and the websites corresponding webpages to provide an IVR like interface. An IVR interface for a website may provide for voice messages and/or commands that user 102 can hear. The voice messages and/or commands may correspond to webpage elements and may provide for a vocal layout of the webpage, for example, announcing the selectable tabs of a webpage, the available fields to enter information for a webpage, and/or the navigational tools of the webpage or the overarching website. In a typical webpage with forms that can be filled out, presentation logic sits on top of the fields and content. The presentation logic is connected to back-end business logic that determines how data can be entered, stored, and/or manipulated (changed, transmitted, etc.). Thus, in order to reuse existing webpage presentation logic without building a new IVR system tied to the backend business logic, webpage IVR application 122 may determine a webpage's IVR flow of existing webpage elements in a webpage and/or webpage form and define/specify IVR flow information on top of the existing webpage elements.” With respect to 132: ‘[0036] Website hosting application 132 may be configured to provide for hosting a website, including presentation of underlying webpages of the website. Website hosting application 132 may provide for webpages that are displayable to user 102 through user device 110. In this regard, user 102 may utilize user device 110 to access one or more websites of website server 130 and view the webpages of the associated domain. The webpages may correspond to Hypertext Markup Language (HTML or similar XHTML and/or CSS) documents that may be accessed and transmitted using Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) by user device 110.” “[0037] In addition to providing the webpages, website hosting application 132 may provide IVR like interfaces using IVR flow information and a software component library provided by IVR server 120. When IVR information flow corresponds to custom HTML tags, website hosting application 132 may insert the custom HTML tags into a webpages HTML document….”
PNG
media_image2.png
660
848
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In this Claim the “second website” is the initial one and interacting with the “second website” cause the system/method to access the “first website” as a subsequent website to get information from the user. In Pujari the “webpage IVR application 122” is down loaded to the user’s system to access another “website hosting 132. So, the IVR 122 is the “second website” and the website 132 is the “first website.”
Pujari does not teach that the IVR 122 is a website.
Kaplan teaches:
accessing a second website to determine second website data corresponding to the second website, the second website data indicating at least one second web element operable to perform a second action using the second website; and [Kaplan, a “transaction server 26” (Figures 1-4) teaches the “second website” of this Claim because this is like the IVR of Pujari and sits on top of and connects to a number of other vendor websites / “first website” and presents a form/webpage to the user that appears as if it were coming from the “first website of Claim 21” / “vendor website”/ “supplier server 12, 14, 16” / “second website of Kaplan” and works as an interface: “A system for enabling a party maintaining a website on the Internet to engage in e-commerce sales transactions over the Internet without creating and supporting necessary transaction software. A second Internet-based server supports the transaction software and provides customized sections for a plurality of associated websites. Each of the associated websites includes links posted on a screen which enable access to the second Internet-based server so that page generated by the second server appear to be pages maintained on the first server. Parties communicating over the Internet with either the first or the second server can engage in e-commerce transactions with the party maintaining the first server. The second server may communicate with the enterprise software of the party maintaining the first server in order to enable and record the transactions.”]
processing the second website data to further configure the first system component. [Kaplan: The icon/bar at the top of the web page of the “vendor website” / “first website of Claim 21” / “first website of Kaplan” is configured by the “second website of Claim and Kaplan” / “transaction server 26” on the browser of the first website so when the user interacts with it, the user is in fact interacting with another remote (transaction server 26) website. “[0005] In accordance with the present invention, a vendor maintains a website providing the conventional information that potential purchasers expect to find, such as promotional material describing the manufacturer and its product line, a catalog of the manufacturer's products and potentially their sales prices, contact information, etc. One of the pages on the website provides some form of icon to be "clicked on" by users of the website who desire to engage in transactions with the web proprietor. In the preferred embodiment of the invention, this icon is formed as a bar running across the website screen. Clicking on this bar activates a link to a second Internet server, typically at a remote site. The second server is maintained by a provider of transaction services and preferably serves a number of vendors. The server associated with the second website maintains customized programs for each of the vendors with customized display pages. When a potential customer visiting the website of one of the vendors activates the transaction link to bring his computer into communication with the second server, that server generates a display of pages which appear to the potential customers as if they form part of and emanated from the vendor's website.”]
Pujari and Kaplan pertain to the user of software that are presented by websites and it would have been obvious to replace the IVR software of Pujari that sits on top of other websites and becomes an interface to those websites with the second website of Kaplan which also sits on top of other vendor websites and makes it appear to the user that the user is interacting with the first website when the user is going through the second website, as substitution of one known element for another to reach results that are expected.
Claim 33 is a system claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 23 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tserbeleu (US 20170171211):
[0021] Embodiments enable a seamless user experience wherein a user is able to navigate from components in website 304 to components of another website 308 running on another cloud. This can occur without requiring website 304 to actually open the other website 308. This enables communication patterns between two cloud systems 301, 305 that can be managed within the context of one cloud system 301.
Jones (U.S. 8346967):
“A method and system for managing redirection for use with a system. The system includes a first webpage and a second webpage. The first webpage is operable to redirect a browser to the second webpage and subsequently, the second webpage is operable to redirect the browser to the first webpage by using a first pre-determined identifier associated with the first webpage. A second identifier associated with a component of the first webpage is assigned. In response to the second webpage redirecting the browser to the first webpage by using the first pre-determined identifier, the first pre-determined identifier is compared against the second identifier to determine whether the second identifier is different from the first pre-determined identifier. In response to a determination that the second identifier is different from the first pre-determined identifier, the browser is redirected to the component of the first webpage by using the second identifier.” Abstract.
Kramer (U.S. 20120209833) Kramer stores its extracted information in an “image feature database.” See [0158] and “[0154] The reference image REFIMG is sent in step T8 to the indexing unit 8 to be used for search in the image feature database 9….” “[0092] In another embodiment of the invention, the storing of the at least one computed feature includes a storage of [0093] a bounding box that defines a region of interest in the at least one image, whereby the region of interest represents an image area that is used to generate the at least one feature,…” “11. The method of claim 10, wherein the generating of the low-level feature includes a determination of a bounding box that defines a region of interest in the at least one image, whereby the region of interest represents an image area that is used to generate the at least one feature.” An example use is provided as filling the elements of a website: “[0160] In another example of the invention a workflow for the query example mentioned above is shown by a FIG. 3. [0161] The query is "Find all patients with similar lesions in the liver and with thoracic lymph nodes enlarged". A radiologist specifies a scribble, which is a GUI representation for a region of interest, e.g. in step T2 the query is set by scribble e.g. of the reference image REFIMG shown. FIG. 4 shows an enlarged view of the query interface, also called GUI of FIG. 3. Subsequently, the user fills the GUI based on a web-based form to limit the search to patients also showing enlarged thoracic lymph nodes. In the following the term system is used as a synonym for method or device.”
Ma (U.S. 20230085061) is directed to a chatbot that searches an appropriate website to obtain the answer to a question.
PNG
media_image3.png
570
524
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
571
298
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Mohapatra (U.S. 20220293096).
Guo (U.S. 20030137537) Figure 2 teaches that the “discourse model 236,” “dialogue model 234” and “domain model 236” are in communication and the “dialog manager module 204” selects the dialog model that accommodates a particular domain. “[0080] …The domain agent 248 obtains information from the domain model 232 and changes the domain model 232, which will affect the behavior of the dialog manager module 204.” “[0038] In the embodiment illustrated, the dialog manager module 204 can include five different knowledge sources comprising a domain model 232, a dialog model 234, a discourse model 236, a task model 238 and a user model 240. Briefly, the domain model 232 contains the information to be sought by or conveyed to the user, while each of the other remaining models 234, 236, 238 and 240 relate to how information is presented. In particular, the dialog model 234 contains information to control a dialog with the user and decide what action to take in a certain situation.….” “[0075] It should be noted that the leap grammar 212 and language templates 266 can also be considered part of the domain model 232 although the dialog manager module 204 can not access this information directly.” he “domain module 232” executes the tasks that are assigned by the input to the “dialog model 234.” “[0069] The frame-based approach is implemented by the USER condition, which generally is a form with many slots. The values of these slots are also part of the discourse model 236. If the dialog manager module 204 finds an unfilled slot, the dialog manager module 204 will repeatedly ask or prompt the user for the missing slots until all the missing slots are filled or the user gives up the current form, and thereby, takes the dialog in a different direction….” “[0039] … Non-verbal action (i.e. non-spoken), like rendering a picture, map or the like, is initiated by a domain agent 248.” “[0080] The domain agent 248 is a module that is responsible for the execution of domain-dependent non-verbal actions. In the example provided above, these actions include switching to different places in the Forbidden City, showing pictures of the Forbidden City, etc. ….”
PNG
media_image5.png
628
854
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Banglaore (U.S. 7,373,300)
Di Fabbrizio (U.S. 7869998) Figure 1, “dialog management 18” teaches the “dialog model” of the Claim is fed by “extended SLU 34” of the reference which teach the “dialog management component” of the Claim because as shown in Figure 3 of Di Fabbrizio, the “Extended SLU 34” decides which “QA Table” / “Dialog model” to select for the particular input. Figure 3, “Select QA table for Call Type “C” 44.” Figures 2 and 3. The Answer “A” teaches the “first action” of the Claim and is determined by the “Extended SLU 34” / “Dialog Management Component” and provided to the “dialog manager 36” for “language generation 38” / “fist action.” Di Fabrrizzio, Figures 2 and 3, the “extended SLU 34” includes a “Classifier 43” which selection from several “QA Tables 46” /templates/ “dialog models” the one that is applicable to the instant Question Q and outputs a “Dialog Manager 36” which teaches the use of dialog models.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIBA SIRJANI whose telephone number is (571)270-1499. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 to 5, M-F.
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, Pierre Desir can be reached on 571-272-7799. 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.
/Fariba Sirjani/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2659
Prosecution Insights