CTNF 18/933,880 CTNF 87883 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 8, and 15 are independent. This Application was published as U.S. 20250061289. Parent priority: 12 February 2020. This Application is a continuation of 17/879,213 issued as U.S. 12,175,205 which is a continuation of 16/789,370 issued as U.S. 11,436,417 which is a continuation-in-part of 16/157,017 issued as U.S. 10,685,187 which is a continuation of 15/595,004 issued as U.S. 10,127,227. A Terminal Disclaimer over the terms of the 3 of the parents is required: U.S. 12,175,205, U.S. 11,436,417, and U.S. 10,127,227 as provided below. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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. Independent Claims 1, 8, and 15 are counterpart system, method, and CRM claims with similar limitations and are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patents Nos. 12,175,205, 11,436,417, and 10,127,227 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following mapping. A table of comparison is set forth further below but is not deemed as helpful as the text of the claims because of the change in language, but not scope, and moving of the similar limitations to the different parts of the claims. The dependent Claims are rejected over the combination of the independent claim of the reference and the 35 USC 103 references applied below and under the same rationale of combination used for the 35 USC 103 combinations. Exemplary method claims are provided below and the method Claim of the instant Application is broader than those of the 3 parents mentioned above in the manner discussed below. Instant Application: 8. A method implemented by one or more processing, the method comprising: accessing a task list that is associated with a second user, the task list including at least: a task that was assigned to the second user by a first user, the task being assigned to the second user via first voice input directed to a first automated assistant interface of a first client device of the first user; and a location condition for notifying the second user of the task, the location condition being specified by the first user via the first voice input; receiving, from the second user and at a second client device, second voice input directed to a second automated assistant interface of the second client device; determining, based on a corresponding location of the second client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is satisfied; determining, based on processing the second voice input, output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device, the output including: first content that is responsive to the second voice input; and second content that includes a task notification including details of the task that was assigned to at least the second user, the second content being included in the output based on the corresponding location of the second client device satisfying the location condition for notifying the second user of the task; and causing the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device. Independent Claims of the instant Application do not include: the access control list of the claims of the parents and access of the first user to the second user device does not require authorization/permission; or performance or completion of the task by the second user; the second user only gets notified and in response to asking for details is provided with details of the task. Independent Claims of the instant Application instead include: specify that the condition to be satisfied for delivery of the notification is location of the second user which was present in the dependent claims of the parent. a two-step process to first notify the second user and then show him the details of the task if he wants to see the details as opposed to a one-step provision of the task details to the second user which was also present in the dependent claims of the parent. U.S. 12175205: 1. A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising: receiving, from a first user and at a first client device, first voice input directed to a first automated assistant interface of the first client device; determining, based on processing the first voice input, that: the first voice input comprises a task, the first voice input assigns the task to at least a second user, and the first voice input specifies one or more conditions for notifying the second user of the task; determining, based on checking an access control list, that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user; in response to determining that the first voice input assigns the task to the second user and in response to determining that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user: selecting a group of multiple second user client devices, from among a plurality of second user client devices, via which to notify the second user of the task, wherein selecting the group of the multiple second user client devices is based on each of the multiple second user client devices being linked to an automated assistant user account of the second user and based on each of the multiple second user client devices having a respective automated assistant interface, and causing, based on determining satisfaction of the one or more conditions, each of the multiple second user client devices of the group to render a corresponding task detail notification of the task that conveys one or more details of the task assigned to the second user; determining, based on user interface input of the second user that is provided at a given one of the multiple second user client devices of the group, that the second user has completed the task; and in response to determining that the second user has completed the task: rendering, at the first client device and responsive to determining that the second user has completed the task, a completion notification that conveys, to the first user, that the second user has completed the task; and causing, responsive to determining that the second user has completed the task, the task to be removed from a pending task list of the second user. U.S. 11,436,417: 1. A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising: receiving first voice input, of a first user, that is directed to an automated assistant interface; determining, based on processing the first voice input, that: the first voice input comprises a task, and the first voice input assigns the task to at least a second user and a third user; determining, based on checking an access control list, that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user and has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the third user; in response to determining that the first voice input assigns the task to the second user and the third user, and in response to determining that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user and the third user: causing a second client device, of the second user, to render a second user task assignment notification that conveys that the first user has assigned the task to the second user without conveying one or more details of the task assigned to the second user, and causing a third client device, of the third user, to render a third user task assignment notification that conveys that the first user has assigned the task to the third user without conveying the one or more details of the task assigned to the third user; in response to determining presence of the second user near the second client device: causing the second client device to render a second user task detail notification of the task that conveys the one or more details of the task assigned to the second user; and in response to determining presence of the third user near the third client device: causing the third client device to render a third user task detail notification of the task that conveys the one or more details of the task assigned to the third user. Not: U.S. 10,685,187 although this too is in the chain of dependency: 9. A method implemented using one or more processors and comprising: executing an automated assistant to which a respective automated assistant client on each of a plurality of client computing devices is communicatively coupled via one or more networks, wherein the automated assistant is further communicatively coupled to a user-controlled resources engine that includes a plurality of services accessible to a plurality of users of the automated assistant, each of the plurality of users having one or more accounts with one or more of the plurality of services, wherein the automated assistant is configured to: receiving a natural language input provided by a first user of the plurality of users at an input device of a first client computing device of the plurality of client computing devices that is operated by the first user, wherein the natural language input from the first user is directed to the automated assistant client executing on the first client computing device; performing semantic processing on the natural language input to recognize a task request; analyzing the task request; based on the analyzing, determining that the task request relates to polling multiple other users of the plurality of users for information pertaining to an upcoming event and checking an access control list relating to the multiple other users to determine whether the first user has appropriate access rights as regards the multiple other users for action to be taken on at least part of the task request; in response to the determination that the first user has appropriate access rights as regards the multiple other users, taking action on at least part of the task request, wherein taking action on at least part of the task request causes the automated assistant clients operating on multiple other client computing devices operated by the multiple other users to engage the multiple other users in respective natural language human-to-computer dialogs, and wherein the respective natural language human-to-computer dialogs solicit free-form natural language responses to the polling; collecting free-form natural language responses to the polling provided by the multiple other users to their respective automated assistant clients; generating a natural language statement that summarizes the collected free-form natural language polling responses; and outputting, by the automated assistant client installed on the first client computing device or another client computing device operated by the first user, the natural language statement. U.S. 10,127,227: 1. A method comprising: executing a respective automated assistant client on each of at least two client computing devices communicatively coupled via one or more networks with an automated assistant, wherein the automated assistant is cloud-based and wherein the automated assistant is further communicatively coupled to a user-controlled resources engine that includes a plurality of services accessible to a plurality of users of the automated assistant, each of the plurality of users having one or more accounts with one or more of the plurality of services; receiving a voice input from one of the plurality of users at an input device of a first client computing device operated by the first user; performing automatic voice recognition on the voice input; recognizing a task request from an output of the automatic voice recognition; analyzing the task request to identify that the task request seeks access to user-controlled resources of a second user of the plurality of users, the second user being associated with a mobile second client computing device; analyzing the task request to identify a geographic constraint and a time constraint imposed by the task request; checking an access control list relating to the plurality of services of the user-controlled resources engine to determine whether the first user has appropriate access rights as regards the second user for action to be taken on at least a portion of the task request; determining that the first user has appropriate access rights as regards the second user for action to be taken on the portion of the task request; reading information from one or more accounts of the second user to which the first user has appropriate access rights including an account of the second user with a location service that makes available, upon request, a position of the second user provided by the mobile second client computing device; obtaining a current position of the second user from the account of the second user with the location service; verifying that the current position of the second user satisfies the geographic constraint; verifying that a current time satisfies the time constraint; causing the automated assistant to engage in a natural language human-to-computer dialog with the second user via the automated assistant client operating on the mobile second client computing device at the current position and the current time; and conveying the portion of the task request to the second user via an output component of the mobile second client computing device. Instant Application Reference Patent 3 8. A method implemented by one or more processing, the method comprising: accessing a task list that is associated with a second user, the task list including at least: a task that was assigned to the second user by a first user, the task being assigned to the second user via first voice input directed to a first automated assistant interface of a first client device of the first user; and a location condition for notifying the second user of the task, the location condition being specified by the first user via the first voice input; receiving, from the second user and at a second client device, second voice input directed to a second automated assistant interface of the second client device; determining, based on a corresponding location of the second client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is satisfied; determining, based on processing the second voice input, output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device, the output including: first content that is responsive to the second voice input; and second content that includes a task notification including details of the task that was assigned to at least the second user, the second content being included in the output based on the corresponding location of the second client device satisfying the location condition for notifying the second user of the task; and causing the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device. 1. A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising: receiving, from a first user and at a first client device, first voice input directed to a first automated assistant interface of the first client device; determining, based on processing the first voice input, that: the first voice input comprises a task, the first voice input assigns the task to at least a second user, and the first voice input specifies one or more conditions for notifying the second user of the task; determining, based on checking an access control list, that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user; in response to determining that the first voice input assigns the task to the second user and in response to determining that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user: selecting a group of multiple second user client devices, from among a plurality of second user client devices, via which to notify the second user of the task, wherein selecting the group of the multiple second user client devices is based on each of the multiple second user client devices being linked to an automated assistant user account of the second user and based on each of the multiple second user client devices having a respective automated assistant interface, and causing, based on determining satisfaction of the one or more conditions, each of the multiple second user client devices of the group to render a corresponding task detail notification of the task that conveys one or more details of the task assigned to the second user; determining, based on user interface input of the second user that is provided at a given one of the multiple second user client devices of the group, that the second user has completed the task; and in response to determining that the second user has completed the task: rendering, at the first client device and responsive to determining that the second user has completed the task, a completion notification that conveys, to the first user, that the second user has completed the task; and causing, responsive to determining that the second user has completed the task, the task to be removed from a pending task list of the second user. Instant Application Reference Patent 10,127,227 8. A method implemented by one or more processing, the method comprising: 1. A method comprising: executing a respective automated assistant client on each of at least two client computing devices communicatively coupled via one or more networks with an automated assistant, wherein the automated assistant is cloud-based and wherein the automated assistant is further communicatively coupled to a user-controlled resources engine that includes a plurality of services accessible to a plurality of users of the automated assistant, each of the plurality of users having one or more accounts with one or more of the plurality of services; accessing a task list that is associated with a second user, the task list including at least: a task that was assigned to the second user by a first user, the task being assigned to the second user via first voice input directed to a first automated assistant interface of a first client device of the first user; and a location condition for notifying the second user of the task, the location condition being specified by the first user via the first voice input; receiving, from the second user and at a second client device, second voice input directed to a second automated assistant interface of the second client device; receiving a voice input from one of the plurality of users at an input device of a first client computing device operated by the first user; performing automatic voice recognition on the voice input; recognizing a task request from an output of the automatic voice recognition; determining, based on a corresponding location of the second client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is satisfied; determining, based on processing the second voice input, output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device, the output including: analyzing the task request to identify that the task request seeks access to user-controlled resources of a second user of the plurality of users, the second user being associated with a mobile second client computing device; analyzing the task request to identify a geographic constraint and a time constraint imposed by the task request; checking an access control list relating to the plurality of services of the user-controlled resources engine to determine whether the first user has appropriate access rights as regards the second user for action to be taken on at least a portion of the task request; determining that the first user has appropriate access rights as regards the second user for action to be taken on the portion of the task request; reading information from one or more accounts of the second user to which the first user has appropriate access rights including an account of the second user with a location service that makes available, upon request, a position of the second user provided by the mobile second client computing device; obtaining a current position of the second user from the account of the second user with the location service; verifying that the current position of the second user satisfies the geographic constraint; verifying that a current time satisfies the time constraint; first content that is responsive to the second voice input; and second content that includes a task notification including details of the task that was assigned to at least the second user, the second content being included in the output based on the corresponding location of the second client device satisfying the location condition for notifying the second user of the task; and causing the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device. causing the automated assistant to engage in a natural language human-to-computer dialog with the second user via the automated assistant client operating on the mobile second client computing device at the current position and the current time; and conveying the portion of the task request to the second user via an output component of the mobile second client computing device. Instant Application Reference Patent 11,436,417 8. A method implemented by one or more processing, the method comprising: accessing a task list that is associated with a second user, the task list including at least: a task that was assigned to the second user by a first user, the task being assigned to the second user via first voice input directed to a first automated assistant interface of a first client device of the first user; and a location condition for notifying the second user of the task, the location condition being specified by the first user via the first voice input; 1. A method implemented by one or more processors, the method comprising: receiving, from the second user and at a second client device, second voice input directed to a second automated assistant interface of the second client device; receiving first voice input, of a first user, that is directed to an automated assistant interface; determining, based on a corresponding location of the second client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is satisfied; determining, based on processing the first voice input, that: the first voice input comprises a task, and the first voice input assigns the task to at least a second user and a third user; determining, based on checking an access control list, that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user and has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the third user; determining, based on processing the second voice input, output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device, the output including: first content that is responsive to the second voice input; and second content that includes a task notification including details of the task that was assigned to at least the second user, the second content being included in the output based on the corresponding location of the second client device satisfying the location condition for notifying the second user of the task; and in response to determining that the first voice input assigns the task to the second user and the third user, and in response to determining that the first user has appropriate access rights to assign tasks to the second user and the third user: causing a second client device, of the second user, to render a second user task assignment notification that conveys that the first user has assigned the task to the second user without conveying one or more details of the task assigned to the second user, and causing a third client device, of the third user, to render a third user task assignment notification that conveys that the first user has assigned the task to the third user without conveying the one or more details of the task assigned to the third user; causing the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device. in response to determining presence of the second user near the second client device: causing the second client device to render a second user task detail notification of the task that conveys the one or more details of the task assigned to the second user; and in response to determining presence of the third user near the third client device: causing the third client device to render a third user task detail notification of the task that conveys the one or more details of the task assigned to the third user. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-5, 8-12, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blanksteen (U.S. 2014/0172953) in view of Miller (U.S. 20200134211) . Regarding Claim 1 , Blanksteen teaches: 1. A system comprising: at least one processor; and [Blanksteen, Figure 4, “processor 402.”] memory storing instructions that, when executed, cause that least one processor to be operable to: [Blanksteen, Figure 4, “computer-readable media 404.”] receive, from a first user and at a first client device, first voice input directed to a first automated assistant interface of the first client device; [Blanksteen, Figure 5, “receive speech input 502.” Figures 1-2, “Scott 104” speaking 213 to the “local device” or “endpoint device 120(1)” which is an Alexa / “first automated assistant interface of a client device.” Figure 2, “microphones 208” as part of the “endpoint device 120(1).” See also Figure 4 for a complete depiction of the components of the various types of “device 120.” The “endpoint devices 120” teach the “client device” of the Claim and include “automated assistants” installed on them: “[0026] FIG. 2 … two endpoint devices are shown, with a first endpoint device in the form of the voice controlled assistant 120(1) residing in the bedroom 110 and the second endpoint device in the form of the voice controlled assistant 120(5) residing in the kitchen 118. …” ] determine, based on processing the first voice input, that: [Blanksteen, Figure 4, “speech recognition module 140.”] the first voice input includes a task, Blanksteen, Figures 2 and 3, the user 104 inputting a task such as “Remind me to take out the garbage tomorrow morning 213” into the client endpoint device 102. “[0012] Described herein are techniques to leverage various computing devices to assist in routine tasks . … a computing system is architected to organize task management across multiple devices with which the user may interact.”] the first voice input assigns the task to at least a second user, and [Blanksteen’s task is assigned to a target user/second user. “[0067] …Further, the target user may be the initial requester or another person .” “[0072] FIG. 6 shows a more detailed process for determining a location of the person, from act 520 of FIG. 5. At 602, an identity of the target person is received….” See also: “[0043] Aspects of the system described herein may be further used to support real time communication between two people . For example, consider a scenario where one user wants to send a message to another user in real time. In this scenario, the first user may provide a message for delivery to the second user. For instance, the first user may speak a message to a first endpoint device, which sends the message to the cloud services for processing. The cloud services may then determine a location of the second user and select a second endpoint device that is available and suitable for delivery of the message to the second user . The message may then be presented to the second user via the second endpoint device.” ] the first voice input specifies a location condition for notifying the second user of the task; [Blanksteen teaches that the User inputs conditions but does not teach that user inputs a location condition. Blanksteen teaches that the system imposes “location conditions” including the privacy condition which appears to be the intent of this Claim and consistent with the dependent Claims but does not teach that the user input establishes the “location conditions.” Figure 2, in the “Remind me to take out the garbage tomorrow morning 213” task to the user, the condition is “tomorrow morning.” Blanksteen’s user input specifies the target person, see Figures 5-7, but not a target location and the system decides which device is best based on location of the device and other criteria. See “choose location 610” in Figure 6 which expands “determine location of the target person to which to respond 520” of Figure 5. Figure 7 which expands on “determine device to send response 522” of Figure 5, chooses a device at the selected location based on criteria including privacy (708) and ends with “choose device with best fit 710.” The “location condition” thus is taught by the conditions used in Figure 6 of Blanksteen. These conditions are not set by the user. ] receive, from the second user and at a second client device, second voice input directed to a second automated assistant interface of the second client device; [Blanksteen, Figure 6, 604-2, when the system is trying to find the location of the target person at 520, one of the methods it uses is 604-2: poll audio devices for voice confirmation which means that the second user’s voice is used to confirm that the second user is present at a particular location. See [0073]. This second voice input in Blanksteen is used to “uniquely identify different people.”] determine, based on a corresponding location of the second client device, that the l ocation condition for notifying the second user of the task is satisfied; [Blanksteen, Figures 5, 520 and all of Figure 6 evaluate whether a location condition for the second device that belongs to the target person is satisfied. However, the location condition is not specified by the first user’s voice and rather is based on possible locations of the target person.] determine, based on processing the second voice input, output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device, [Blanksteen, Figure 6, 604-2, which is a part of Figure 5, 520 finding the location of the target person/second user in order to deliver the “response” / could be response of the system which is based on what the first user has specified such as the reminders shown in Figure 3.] the output including: first content that is responsive to the second voice input; and [Blanksteen, Figure 3, Scenario A or Scenario B combined with Figure 6, 604-2. What the user says determines his location and prompts the device to deliver the message and is therefor “responsive to the second voice input.” But Blankstee does not teach first and second content are not distinguished from one another. (Except the Claim is also rather broad and does not set forth what the second voice input may be and how the first content and second content are different. First content is just that first content with no particulars about it. Also, the second voice of Blanksteen is used for identifying the recipient/target whereas the second voice of the instant Application has a different purpose which is not claimed.)] second content that includes a task details notification including details of the task that was assigned to at least the second user, the second content being included in the output based on the corresponding location of the second client device satisfying the location condition for notifying the second user of the task; and [Blanksteen, Figure 3, Scenario B: “Don’t forget to pick up your wife’s anniversary present 314.” The caveat being that the “location condition” is not one that is set by the user in his initial input and rather one determined by the system according to the flowcharts of Figures 6 and 7.] cause the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device. [Blanksteen, Figure 5, “timely send response to device at determined location 524.” Figure 3, Scenario B above where the task is output by Alexa. Here the second user / target user is the same as the first user /Scott who set the reminder for himself.] Blanksteen teaches that the user sets a condition for delivery of the message back to himself (target user) but does not teach that the condition is a “location condition.” Blanksteen teaches that the location of the user may be determined according to voice identification and based on the voice of the target user /second user and therefor the delivery of the message would be “responsive to the second user voice input.” But, does not teach that the notification (such as the one shown in Figure 3 at 312) and the actual message (Figure 3, 314) are both in the same output. Miller teaches: receive, from the second user and at a second client device, second voice input directed to a second automated assistant interface of the second client device; [Miller, Figure 3D, 310: Computer-Assistant what is the next event on my schedule? This is Bob’s voice talking to assistant 315. Figure 4, “receive by the computing device a request from a user 410 or Figure 6, 610.] determine, based on a corresponding location of the second client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is satisfied; [Miller, Figures 4, 450, 5, 520, and 6, 650 where the system determines an “environmental privacy level for the environment of the computing device by analyzing environmental data collected by the computing device.” Part of the environmental data is the location of the shared device 315. Also “location condition” is not defined by the Claim and can be interpreted as a condition imposed on the location such as a “private location” or a “public location” which is taught by Miller. “[0074] In one aspect, a user input can be used to establish the privacy-level of the environment. A user may indicate during set up or some other time that the personal assistant 315 is located in a public setting. For example, a personal assistant 315 located in a conference room or common area in an office may be designated by a user as public. This type of device may be a shared device that receives commands and requests from multiple users. As mentioned, a shared device may use different mechanisms to identify an individual user, such as voice analysis, facial recognition, or other biometric methods. I f the device settings indicate that the device is in a public location, then the environmental privacy level may always resolve to a public designation . In another aspect, the device was such a setting may have a default of a public location b ut can use other signal data to determine that a user is alone in the environment . For example, an audio or visual analysis of the environment could indicate that the user is alone in the environment.” ] determine, based on processing the second voice input, output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device, [Miller, Figure 3D, 310: Computer-Assistant what is the next event on my schedule? This is Bob’s voice talking to assistant 315.] the output including: first content that is responsive to the second voice input; and [Miller, Figure 3D, 330: Bob I have sent information about your next event to your phone.] second content that includes a task details notification including details of the task that was assigned to at least the second user, the second content being included in the output based on the corresponding location of the second client device satisfying the location condition for notifying the second user of the task; and [Miller, Figure 3D, the content of the next event is provided privately to Bob on his phone 340 based on his location not being private and other people 335, 325 being present.] cause the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device. [Miller, Figure 3D, 330: Bob I have sent information about your next event to your phone. Figure 5, 540: select a second communication channel for outputting the communication to the user in response to determining the privacy context is classified, wherein the second channel is not the default communication channel.] Blanksteen and Miller pertain to the conditional use of assistant devices and it would have been obvious to combine the various levels of information provided by the messages of Miller that depend on the privacy level of the environment/location as a location condition for the message and provide the graduated messages of Miller in combination with the system of Blanksteen that also considers the privacy of the location but does not expressly teach providing both the notification and actual detailed message at the same time. This combination falls under combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results or use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. See MPEP 2141, KSR, 550 U.S. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. Regarding Claim 2 , Blanksteen teaches: 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further operable to: prior to receiving the second voice input directed to the second automated assistant interface of the second client device: determine presence of the second user near a third client device [Blanksteen, Figure 6, 604: Determine possible locations of target person 604 and Figure 7, 702: Receive location of target person and 704: discover possible devices proximal to target person. This means that if a third device is near the second user, Blanksteen knows.] determine, based on a corresponding location of the third client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is not satisfied; and [Blanksteen, Figure 7, 706-06: analyze room environment (eg number of people) and 708: evaluate whether response has special criteria (e.g. privacy) and 710: choose device with best fit. “0090] At 710, the best endpoint device 120 is chosen. This decision may be based on scoring the various analyses 706-1 to 706-M, ranking the results, and applying any special criteria to the results. In this example, the device with the highest score in the end, will be chosen .” Blanksteen does not teach that if all the criteria are bad, it forgoes the delivery.] in response to determining the presence of the second user near the third client device and in response to determining that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is not satisfied: cause a task assignment notification to be provided for presentation to the second user via the third automated assistant interface of the third client device, the task assignment notification indicating that the task has been assigned to the second user without conveying any details of the task. Blanksteen does not teach that if all the criteria are bad, it forgoes the delivery. It picks one even if it is the worst. Miller teaches: determine, based on a corresponding location of the third client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is not satisfied ; and [Miller, Figures 3C and 3D, environment is not private for the message. “[0011] FIG. 3C depicts a personal assistant communicating sensitive information to a user in a public environment using modified content, in accordance with an aspect of the technology: [0012] FIG. 3D depicts a personal assistant communicating sensitive information to a user in a public environment using alternative communication channel, in accordance with an aspect of the technology;”] in response to determining the presence of the second user near the third client device and in response to determining that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is not satisfied : [Miller Figure 3D, environment is not private. Figure 4, 450, Figure 5, 520, Figure 6, 650. “[0083] Next, the personal assistant 315 can evaluate the privacy-level of the environment. Many different types of signals can be used to determine the privacy-level of the environment including, visual analysis, audio analysis, signal analysis, contextual data, and user inputs. In this case, the personal assistant 315 determines that the second user 325, third user 330, and fourth user 335 are present in the room. In this example, one or more of the other users do not have access to the meeting information and the environmental-privacy is determined to be public.”] cause a task assignment notification to be provided for presentation to the second user via the third automated assistant interface of the third client device, the task assignment notification indicating that the task has been assigned to the second user without conveying any details of the task . [Miller, Figures 3C and 3D, “Bob you have an event at 3pm (content is modified) 320G” and “Bob I have sent information about your next event to your phone 320A.” Figure 4, 480, 490, Figure 5, 560, 570, Figure 6, 680 and 690. “[0084] A privacy level of the environment can be compared to the privacy level of the content to select a communication channel and modification strategy. In this case, a sensitive content privacy level could be compared to a public environmental privacy level. In this case, modification is needed because the privacy level of the environment is less than the privacy level of the content. A modified response can be provided on the default audible communication channel may be used and additional information can be sent to the user's phone 340. The personal assistant 315 provides a modified response 320 stating, “Bob, I have sent information about your next event to your phone.” At the same time, the meeting details can be provided to the phone 340, which allows the user 305 to view the details without the other users receiving the information.”] Rationale for combination as provided for Claim 1. Regarding Claim 3 , Blanksteen teaches: 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further operable to: prior to receiving the second voice input directed to the second automated assistant interface of the second client device: receive, from the second user and at a third client device, third voice input directed to a third automated assistant interface of the third client device; [Blanksteen, Figure 6 finds the target person by polling the optical devices for visual information 604-1 or audio devices for voice confirmation or locates portable devices associated with the target person 604-3 or by other means. At 604-2 the system uses the voice of the target/second user to identify him which teaches the third voice input of the Claim. Any of the devices in the vicinity and found in Figures 6 or 7 teach the third device of this Claim.] determine, based on a corresponding location of the third client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is not satisfied; [Blanksteen, Figure 7 as applied to Claim 2 evaluates the privacy of the devices (third device) that are near the target/second user. 706-6 and 708.] determine, based on processing the third voice input, additional output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the third automated assistant interface of the third client device, the additional output including: [Blanksteen, Figure 7, 710 selects one of the devices (third device) which is selected based on voice identification ([0073]) to deliver the message.] third content that is responsive to the third voice input; and fourth content that includes a task assignment notification indicating that the task has been assigned to the second user without conveying any details of the task; and cause the additional output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the third automated assistant interface of the third client device. Blanksteen does not teach that if all the criteria are bad, it forgoes the delivery. It picks one even if it is the worst. Miller teaches and the combination of teachings suggest : determine, based on a corresponding location of the third client device, that the location condition for notifying the second user of the task is not satisfied; [Miller, Figures 3C and 3D and rejection of Claim 2. When the environment does not have the requisite privacy. Third voice input is input by Bob asking for his schedule: 310 in Figures 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D. “[0080] Next, the personal assistant 315 can evaluate the privacy-level of the environment. Many different types of signals can be used to determine the privacy-level of the environment including, visual analysis, audio analysis, signal analysis, contextual data, and user inputs . In this case, the personal assistant 315 determines that the second user 325, third user 330, and fourth user 335 are present in the room. In this example, one or more of the other users do not have access to the meeting information and the environmental-privacy is determined to be public.”] determine, based on processing the third voice input, additional output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the third automated assistant interface of the third client device, the additional output including: [Miller, Third voice input is input by Bob asking for his schedule: Computer-Assistant what is the next event on my schedule? 310 in Figures 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D and the output is a response to this input and therefore based on it.] third content that is responsive to the third voice input; and [Miller, Figure 3D, third content = 320A which tells Bob that information is sent to his phone.] fourth content that includes a task assignment notification indicating that the task has been assigned to the second user without conveying any details of the task; and [Miller, Figure 3C, fourth content = “Bob you have an event at 3pm 320G.”] cause the additional output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the third automated assistant interface of the third client device . [Miller, the “additional output” includes both the 320A and 320G which is output by the “personal assistant 315” and the “user’s phone 340.” The two are not shown in the same scenario and a combination of the two scenarios suggests this limitation.] Rationale for combination as provided Regarding Claim 4 , Blanksteen teaches: 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions to cause the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device comprise instructions to: cause the output to be audibly rendered for presentation to the second user via one or more speakers of the second client device. [Blanksteen’s device is usually an Alexa that renders audibly. Figure 4, “speakers 434.” Figure 2 showing the audio rendition of “Don’t forget to take out the garbage. 230.”] Regarding Claim 5 , Blanksteen teaches: 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions to cause the output to be provided for presentation to the second user via the second automated assistant interface of the second client device comprise instructions to: cause the output to be visually rendered for presentation to the second user via a display of the second client device. [Blanksteen’s device may be one of the devices shown in Figure 4 which include a display. “Output devices 430.”] Miller expressly teaches output by display when the content is private as shown in Figure 3D and relegating the details to the personal phone 340 of Bob 305. Blanksteen and Miller pertain to the conditional use of assistant devices and it would have been obvious to substitute the output by display of Miller in the case of a sensitive subject for waiting until the target has audio privacy to expedite the delivery. This combination falls under combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results or use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. See MPEP 2141, KSR, 550 U.S. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. Claim 8 is a method Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 9 is a method Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 2 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 10 is a method Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 3 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 11 is a method Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 4 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 12 is a method Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 5 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 15 is a CRM system Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale. Additionally, the “computer readable medium” of the Claim is taught by “computer readable media 216” of Figure 2 of Blanksteen. Claim 16 is a CRM system Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 2 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 17 is a CRM system Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 4 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 18 is a CRM system Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claims 4 and 5 and is rejected under similar rationale . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blanksteen and Miller and further in view of Jayanathi (U.S. 20150179000) . Regarding Claim 6 , Blanksteen and Miller do not discuss the details what happens when a task is done although it is understood that once Alexa has told Bob to take the garbage out, it is not going to ask again. Jayanathi teaches: 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further operable to: determine, based on user interface input of the second user directed to the second automated assistant interface of the second client device, that the second user has completed the task; and [Jayanathi, Figure 4, “determine status of completion report to coordination server 413.”] in response to determining that the second user has completed the task: [Jayanathi, Figure 4, “Done? 415”] cause additional output to be provided for presentation to the first user via the first automated assistant interface of the first client device or via a third automated assistant interface of the third client device; and [Jayanathi, Figure 4, “Done? 415” to YES to “Report and exit 417.” Reporting is the to coordinator/first user who assigned the task.] [Jayanathi, cause the task to be removed from a task list of the second user. [Jayanathi, Figure 2, “review current tasks 223” and Figure 3, “task actions 381” including “done 353” and the coordinator can dynamically change the tasks and delete those that have been done. “[0062] The review current tasks icon 223 opens a list of tasks currently assigned to the user that the user can review and provide a status information or response to. ….” “[0063] … Later on during navigation, additional dynamically assigned tasks also show up in the list while those reassigned to another user are deleted automatically from the list of tasks displayed .” “[0067] … The user can select one of the tasks in the list 315 and provide a status information or response indicating completion, etc. For example, using the task actions 381, the user can indicate if a task is done 353, skipped 355 or deferred 357….” “11. … correspondingly adding new task lists for the added additional destinations or deleting one or more destination-specific task lists for those of the multiple destinations that are removed, as necessary.”] Blanksteen/Miller and Jayanathi include assignment of tasks and it would have been obvious to combine the task accounting of Jayanathi with the system of combination to cross out the done tasks. This combination falls under combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results or use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. See MPEP 2141, KSR, 550 U.S. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. Claim 13 is a method Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 6 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 19 is a CRM system Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 6 and is rejected under similar rationale . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 7, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blanksteen and Miller and further in view of Sharma (U.S. 20170230316) . Regarding Claim 7 , Blanksteen and Miller do not specify a location condition to be a particular environment. (In addition to Sharma see the “locational condition” that was mapped to Cohen in the parent application.) Sharma teaches: 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the location condition for notifying the second user of the task specifies a particular environment or an area within the particular environment. [Sharma teaches that the location of a second user B may be set by a first user A as a condition for access or communication: “[0307] A user may also set criteria by which “unfriending” occurs automatically. Such criteria can be a time limit of access shared with user B, a location condition placed on user B, and so on. For example, services may be shared with the other user B for a preset amount of time, or until the other user leaves a particular area.” “[0314] As described above, the shared access offered by the initiating user A of the mobile device 100 to other users B can be completely controlled by the user A of the initiating mobile device 100 such that access by any of the shared access users B can be terminated at any time by the owner user A, as well as being limited to a certain level of control, a certain time period of control, control limited to within a certain area/location, etc.” See also: “[0105] Various entities and concepts may be represented as units of data in the semantic language. … For example, a semantic atom 1000 could represent a command, a person, a business, a movie, a location, a WiFi access point, a song, a Social media post, a light bulb, a car, a GPS device, a virtual assistant, etc.” “[0137] As another example, c ommercial services can monitor deals available in stores in a geographic area and toss atoms 1000 representing those deals to a user or into a chat of several users, potentially based on the geographic location of those users….” ] Blanksteen/Miller and Sharma pertain to messaging by use of a virtual assistant (Virtual assistant system to enable actionable messaging. Title) and it would have been obvious to use the location condition of Sharma which permits one user A to limit access and communication with another user B to a particular geographic area with the system of combination in order to set presence of the target user in a particular geographic area as a condition of conveying the communication/message to that user as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. ( Cohen (U.S. 7,945,470) , Figure 2A, 207, Location as a condition of a task. The description of Location in Cohen shows that it could be a state or a city which teaches “particular environment, or an area within the particular environment” of the Claim: “With respect to FIG. 2A, a series of six example tasks 211a-211f are shown in a table. The table containing the tasks may, for example, be part of the Available Tasks database 145 of FIGS. 1A and 1B. In this example, the table has various columns including a task identifier 201, a description of the task 203, associated qualifications 205, an associated geographical location 207 (in this example represented as a zip code), and various capabilities 209 of one or more mobile or other devices for use in performing the task. In some embodiments, locations may be specified in other manners (e.g., GPS coordinates; street addresses; governmental boundaries, such as for cities, counties, regions and states; telephone area codes; etc .), some tasks may have multiple associated geographic locations, and tasks other task 211f may not have any associated geographic location….” Col. 10, line 63 to Col. 11, line 35.) Claim 14 is a method Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 7 and is rejected under similar rationale. Claim 20 is a CRM system Claim with limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 7 and is rejected under similar rationale. Conclusion 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 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 at 571-272-7799. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Blanksteen: PNG media_image1.png 714 523 media_image1.png Greyscale Miller: PNG media_image2.png 600 542 media_image2.png Greyscale 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. /FARIBA SIRJANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 2 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 3 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 4 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 5 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 6 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 7 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 8 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 9 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 10 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 11 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 12 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 13 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 14 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 15 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 16 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 17 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 18 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 19 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 20 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 21 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 22 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 23 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 24 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 25 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 26 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 27 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 28 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 29 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 30 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 31 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 32 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 33 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 34 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 35 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 36 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 37 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 38 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 39 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 40 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 41 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 42 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 43 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 44 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 45 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 46 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 47 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 48 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 49 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 50 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 51 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 52 Art Unit: 2659 Application/Control Number: 18/933,880 Page 53 Art Unit: 2659
Prosecution Insights