Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Zong (US 20250247397).
Regarding claim 1, Zong teaches, a method (abstract) comprising:
determining, at a computing device, a relative weightage of human-in-the-loop component usage to artificial intelligence component usage in a computing process that includes human decision-making and artificial intelligence decision-making (Paragraph 22, 97: managing the use of AI model and human reasoning to maintain a balance by maintaining utilization level within a predetermined target range and to prevent overuse of one or more resource);
when the relative weightage is below a given range, such that the human-in-the-loop component usage is low relative to the artificial intelligence component usage: adjusting, via the computing device, the computing process to increase the human-in-the-loop component usage relative to the artificial intelligence component usage (Paragraph 18: current utilization level of the computing resource, and a controlling speed of data request recommended by an artificial intelligence (AI) model monitoring the anomaly event, so that the utilization level of the computing resource is maintained within a predetermined target range. Paragraph 21: The controlling speed of data request, as recommended by the artificial intelligence may be validated by a human reasoning based model configured to monitor and mitigate a risk associated with any counter-intuitive or non-intuitive recommendations of the AI model. The AI model and human reasoning based models may work in a coordinated manner so that the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource is maintained within a predetermined target range. Paragraph 24: a utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource may be evaluated. Based on the evaluation of the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource, the speed of data requests received at the computing resource may be dynamically adjusted to maintain the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource within a predetermined target range. The predetermined target range may be between 60% and 70% of a maximum utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource. Paragraph 107: The AI model and the human reasoning-based model may work together to maintain the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource within a predetermined target range “so in other word “balancing will reads on increase/decrease the human-in-the-loop component usage relative to the artificial intelligence component usage in order to balance the usage as taught by Zong”); and
when the relative weightage is above the given range, such that the human-in-the-loop component usage is high relative to the artificial intelligence component usage: adjusting, via the computing device, the computing process to decrease the human-in-the-loop component usage relative to the artificial intelligence component usage (Paragraph 18: current utilization level of the computing resource, and a controlling speed of data request recommended by an artificial intelligence (AI) model monitoring the anomaly event, so that the utilization level of the computing resource is maintained within a predetermined target range. Paragraph 21: The controlling speed of data request, as recommended by the artificial intelligence may be validated by a human reasoning-based model configured to monitor and mitigate a risk associated with any counter-intuitive or non-intuitive recommendations of the AI model. The AI model and human reasoning-based models may work in a coordinated manner so that the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource is maintained within a predetermined target range. Paragraph 24: a utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource may be evaluated. Based on the evaluation of the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource, the speed of data requests received at the computing resource may be dynamically adjusted to maintain the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource within a predetermined target range. The predetermined target range may be between 60% and 70% of a maximum utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource. Paragraph 107: The AI model and the human reasoning-based model may work together to maintain the utilization level of the cloud-based computing resource within a predetermined target range “so in other word “balancing will reads on increase/decrease the human-in-the-loop component usage relative to the artificial intelligence component usage in order to balance the usage as taught by Zong”).
Regarding claim 13, see claim 1 rejection, as for “computing device: see Fig. 3A, el. 300) comprising: a controller: el. 322; and a computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon program instructions: el. 326).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-12,14-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA EL-ZOOBI whose telephone number is (571)270-3434. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn Edward can be reached at (571)270-7136. 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.
/MARIA EL-ZOOBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights