DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12 December 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 20 May 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim is directed to a signal per se.
Claim 13 sets forth a “computer readable storage medium.” However, the specification as originally filed does not explicitly define the computer readable medium stating that it '. . . may be any usable medium…’ (Para. 123). The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is obliged to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification during proceedings before the USPTO. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (during patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable media (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is absent an explicit definition or is silent. See MPEP 2111.01. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Aug. 24, 2009; p. 2
A claim drawn to a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to overcome the rejection by changing "A computer readable medium" to --A non-transitory computer readable medium--, thus excluding that portion of the scope covering transitory signals.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The claims recite, in various forms, displaying reply information of a digital assistant in an interactive window between a user and the digital assistant, wherein the reply information is generated based on first request information of the user, and in response to a preset operation associated with the reply information, displaying first content that is content about a generation process of the reply information. The claims further recite variations such as: specifying types of interactive windows (chat, group chat, floating window); including segment matching results in the first content; including request and/or reply information in the first content; including source, preview, identification, matching degree, and sequence information in the segment matching results; determining sequence information based on matching degree; displaying second content or a source page in response to trigger operations; associating trigger operations with source information; and generating reply information using a natural language processing capability of a language model.
Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the core limitations of displaying reply information, displaying content about the generation process, organizing content based on matching results, and responding to trigger operations are processes that fall within the “mental processes” groupings of abstract ideas. But for the recitation of generic computer components (e.g., “interactive window,” “processor,” “memory,” “computer-readable storage medium”), these steps could be performed in the mind or by a human using pen-and-paper. For example:
A person could manually show or tell another person the reply generated in response to a request.
A person could explain how the reply was generated, including matching segments, their source, preview, identification, matching degree, and sequence.
A person could order content by relevance and present it in response to a request.
A person could show more detail or a source document when prompted.
The limitation of displaying reply information of the digital assistant based on first request information of the user, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “in an interactive window between a user and a digital assistant,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “interactive window” language, “displaying” in the context of this claim encompasses a person manually showing or telling another person the reply information generated in response to the request.
Similarly, the limitation of displaying first content about a generation process of the reply information in response to a preset operation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, but for the “interactive window” language, “displaying” in this context encompasses a person manually explaining or showing the steps they took to generate a reply when asked or prompted (the “preset operation”). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, claims 1-20 recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites one additional element – displaying the reply information and the first content in an interactive window between a user and a digital assistant. The interactive window is recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic user interface performing the generic computer function of presenting information in response to a user operation) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a generic interactive window to perform both the displaying steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Yao (US 20250307284 A1).
As for Claim 1, Yao discloses An information processing method, comprising:
displaying, in an interactive window (i.e. session module 4552 – Fig.2 & ¶ 0130), between a user and a digital assistant reply information of the digital assistant, wherein the reply information is generated based on first request information of the user (i.e. The server 200 obtains a second message for replying the first message, the second message including key information for replying the first message and a citation tag for each key information)( ¶ 0037); and
in response to a preset operation(i.e. clicking on the citation tag - citation tag 404a – Fig.4a ) associated with the reply information(key information 403a – Fig.4A), displaying first content (i.e. content that includes source information about the reply which includes, but is not limited to the target key information displayed in the target search result and the citation interface displayed in in the reference source window)( ¶ 0065), wherein the first content is content about a generation process of the reply information(i.e. Clicking a citation/reference causes the system to retrieve the associated search result, locate the relevant supporting passage inside the source, and display that passage in a reference source window as target key information(first content).)( ¶ 0044 and 0065)
As for Claims 2 and 14, Yao discloses wherein the interactive window comprises one or more of the following:
a chat window between the user and the digital assistant (fig. 4c – i.e. the human-computer interaction interface displays a question 401C and an answer 402C.)( ¶ 0073);
a group chat window comprising the user and the digital assistant; and
a floating window of the digital assistant.
As for Claims 3 and 15, Yao discloses wherein the first content comprises at least one segment matching result (i.e. user clicks on a citation tag(“…”[3]) which displays the specific paragraph/section in a source in a search result (segment matching result) in a separate reference window)(Fig. 4C & ¶ 0073); and
the reply information is generated based on the at least one segment matching result.(i.e. the search result that is displayed corresponds to the key information(reply))( ¶ 0073)
As for Claims 4 and 16, Yao discloses wherein the first content comprises: the first request information; and/or the reply information (i.e. a citation interface window is displayed as a result of clicking on the citation tag of the target key information. The reference window displays a portion of source content(first content) that shows the target key information(reply))( ¶ 0065)
As for Claims 5 and 17, Yao discloses wherein the segment matching result comprises at least one of the following:
source information of segment content,
preview information of the segment content(i.e. fig.5a shows a hover mode where hovering over the citation tag shows a different, preview-like display option that is shown only while the mouse is hovering over the label. If the label is clicked it goes into the reference source window display mode)( ¶ 0088), and
identification information of the segment content.
As for Claim 6, Yao discloses wherein the segment matching result (i.e. target search result) further comprises one or more of the following:
a matching degree between the segment content and the first request information (i.e. before ranking search results, the system performs word segmentation and semantic understanding on both the user’s first message and the original search results. Each search-result segment is analyzed for relevance to the user message (determines a degree of matching) and the highest relevance value is used as the relevance score for ranking original search results.)( ¶ 0093-0094);
identification information of the segment matching result, wherein the identification information is used for identifying that the reply information is generated based on the segment matching result; and
sequence information of the matching result.
As for Claim 7, Yao discloses wherein the first content comprises at least one segment matching result, and the displaying first content comprises:
determining sequence information of the at least one matching result based on a matching degree between segment content (i.e. content inside segment matching result) corresponding to the at least one matching result and the first request information (i.e. the following processing for each of the candidate search results: performing segmentation processing on the candidate search result to obtain a plurality of segments; obtaining a semantic relevance between each of the segments and the first message; sorting the plurality of segments in descending order based on the semantic relevance of the plurality of segments to obtain at least one segment ranking top as a candidate segment; and performing, for each candidate segment, front-back extension processing with a set window length in a candidate search result corresponding to the candidate segment to obtain an extended segment of each candidate segment, and using the extended segment as a key content corresponding to the candidate search result. According to this embodiment of this disclosure, a relevance between a key content and a question can be improved, thereby improving accuracy of an answer)( ¶ 0097); and
displaying the first content corresponding to the sequence information of the at least one matching result (i.e. taking the expansion segment as the key content of the corresponding candidate search result to be used to generate first content.)( ¶ 0097).
As for Claims 8 and 19, Yao discloses wherein the first content comprises a first segment matching result, and the method further comprises: in response to a first trigger operation for the first content (i.e. clicking expanded view), displaying second content (i.e. a larger portion of first content), wherein the second content comprises segment content corresponding to the first segment matching result. (i.e. initially, the source content provided when displaying first content is focused in on the paragraph in which the target information is found. When the user clicks on expanded full text control 504B, a expanded view of the key information is shown where more content around the key information is shown.)( ¶ 0112)
As for Claims 9 and 20, Yao discloses wherein the first content comprises a first segment matching result, and the method further comprises: in response to a second trigger operation for the first content, displaying a source page of segment content corresponding to the first segment matching result, wherein display content of the source page is the segment content corresponding to the first segment matching result (i.e. In some embodiments, referring to FIG. 5C, a question 501C and an answer 502C are shown in the human-computer interaction interface, the answer 502C includes a reference source 503C, and the full text of the reference source is displayed in response to a trigger operation for the reference source 503C. Fig.5B to 5C shows the transition from expanded view to full source view.)(Fig. 5B, 5C & ¶ 0113).
As for Claim 10, Yao discloses wherein the second trigger operation comprises an operation associated with source information of the segment content in the first content.(i.e. In some embodiments, referring to FIG. 5C, a question 501C and an answer 502C are shown in the human-computer interaction interface, the answer 502C includes a reference source 503C, and the full text of the reference source is displayed in response to a trigger operation for the reference source 503C) (Fig. 5B, 5C & ¶ 0113)
As for Claim 11, Yao discloses wherein the digital assistant ( i.e. chatsvr – Fig. 6; In some embodiments, referring to Figure 6, firstly, the terminal sends the
user-input question to the chat server chatsvr)( ¶ 0114) generates the reply information based on a natural language processing capability of a language model. (In some embodiments, the above text generation processing is performed on at least one key content to obtain a second message for replying to the first message, which may be implemented by the following technical solution: combining at least one key content to obtain a combined result; performing natural language text generation processing to the combined result to obtain a second message for replying the first message.)( ¶ 0099)
As for Claim 12, Yao discloses An electronic device, comprising a processor and a memory; the processor is configured to execute instructions stored in the memory, so that the electronic device perform the method according to claim 1. (i.e. The processor of a computer device reads the computer-executable instructions from a computer-readable storage medium, and executes the computer-executable instructions to cause the computer device to perform the information processing method described in the embodiments of this application.)( ¶ 0146)
As for Claim 13, Yao discloses A computer-readable storage medium, comprising instructions, the instructions instruct an electronic device to perform the method according to claim 1. (i.e. The processor of a computer device reads the computer-executable instructions from a computer-readable storage medium, and executes the computer-executable instructions to cause the computer device to perform the information processing method described in the embodiments of this application.)( ¶ 0146)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN ESTRADA whose telephone number is (571) 272-9978. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM EST to 4:00 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, CHRIS PARRY can be reached on (571) 272-8328. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
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.
/J.E./Examiner, Art Unit 2451
/Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights