DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/27/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of record does not teach determining that the process request changes an atomic dialog definition of a plurality of atomic dialog definitions associated with the one or more processes of the organization" and/or "retraining the atomic dialogue definition based upon the process request without retraining the plurality of atomic dialog definitions (Amendment, pages 8 – 11).
The examiner disagrees, since Kishimoto et al. disclose “dialog systems can play a key role in the functioning of an organization, such as a business, government, group or other entity. For example, many critical decisions may result from discussions in chat systems, or chat-like conversation systems or chatbots. A chatbot may be an operation which conducts a dialog or conversation, audible, visual, and/or via textual methods. Organizations may seek to capture and analyze these decisions to make various improvements to a structure of the organization (improvements to a structure of the organization from decisions in dialog/chat systems implies processing request changes an atomic dialog definition of a plurality of atomic dialog definitions associated with the one or more processes of the organization; paragraph 18). The learning component 408 may be a machine learning component for training and learning one or more machine learning models and also for learning, applying inferences, and/or reasoning pertaining to one or more domains, concepts, features, problems and relationships between the domains, or a combination thereof to the machine learning model for the dialog manager 406. For example, the learning component 408 may learn one or more preferences for variables in a selected domain, one or more preferences for one or more user interface (“UP”) elements for multiple domains”; (applying learning/training models in selected domains, concepts for the dialog manager implies retraining the atomic dialogue definition based upon the process request without retraining the plurality of atomic dialog definitions; paragraphs 78, 97).
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 11, 13 – 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,154,055. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 - 20 of the instant application are similar in scope and content of claims 1 – 11, 13 – 20 of the cited patent.
It would have been obvious to an artisan at the time the invention was made to use the teaching of claims 1 – 11, 13 – 20 of the patent (055) as a general teaching for combining organizational structure data with behavior/process definitions, to perform method/system as claimed in the present invention. The instant claims obviously encompass the claimed invention of the '055' patent and differ only in the method steps. The extent that the instant claims are broaden and therefore generic to claimed invention of '856' patent [species], In re Goodman 29 USPQ 2d 2010 CAFC 1993, states that a generic claim cannot be issued without a terminal disclaimer, if a species claim has been previously been claimed in a patent/copending application. And since the structure is as recited, the method step is obtained and therefore, obvious.
Here is a comparison between claim 6 of the instant application and claim 1 of the cited patent.
Instant Application 18/941,126
Cited Patent 12,154,055
Comparison
6.A virtual agent system including one or more processors and one or more memories configured to perform operations comprising:
1. A virtual agent system including one or more processors and one or more memories configured to perform operations comprising:
Same
loading at least one model related to one or more processes of an organization, wherein the at least one model is based on structure information and one or more of procedures and protocols related to the organization, wherein the structure information is included in a set of structure definitions;
loading at least one model related to one or more processes of an organization, wherein the at least one model is based on structure information and one or more of procedures and protocols related to the organization, wherein the structure information is included in a set of structure definitions, and wherein the set of structure definitions comprises comprise a user responsibility in the organization;
Similar
receiving and analyzing a process request, related to the one or more processes of the organization, from a user of the organization, to implement the at least one model to execute the one or more processes in response to the process request; using a security interface to limit access to the process data when the user of the organization lacks the process rights in the user responsibility in the organization to execute the process request, wherein the process rights are based on a profile of the user of the organization;
storing process data related to the organization in a datastore; and receiving and analyzing a process request, related to the one or more processes of the organization, from a user of the organization, to implement the at least one model to execute the one or more processes in response to the process request when the user of the organization has process rights in the user responsibility in the organization to execute the process request and using a security interface to limit access to the process data when the user of the organization lacks the process rights in the user responsibility in the organization to execute the process request, wherein the process rights are based on a profile of the user of the organization;
Similar
determining that the process request changes an atomic dialog definition of a plurality of atomic dialog definitions associated with the one or more processes of the organization; and
determining that the process request changes an atomic dialog definition of a plurality of atomic dialog definitions associated with the one or more processes of the organization; and
Same
retraining the atomic dialogue definition based upon the process request without retraining the plurality of atomic dialog definitions.
retraining the atomic dialogue definition based upon the process request without retraining the plurality of atomic dialog definitions.
Same
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 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balko (US PAP 2013/0006887) in view of Chen et al. (US PAP 2018/0082683); and further in view of Kishimoto et .
As per claims 1, 8, and 15, Balko teaches a system including one or more processors and one or more memories configured to perform operations comprising:
loading at least one model related to one or more processes of an organization, wherein the at least one model is based on structure information and one or more of procedures and protocols related to the organization, wherein the structure information is included in a set of structure definitions ("providing automatic identification of semantically coherent, user-aligned fragments in business process models. Business process management (BPM) can include representing processes of an organization as components, steps, or data flows within a model SO that current business processes can be analyzed, automated, optimized, engineered, or extended."; paragraph 12);
receiving and analyzing a process request, related to the one or more processes of the organization, from a user of the organization, to implement the at least one model to execute the one or more processes in response to the process request("providing automatic identification of semantically coherent, user-aligned fragments in business process models. Business process management (BPM) can include representing processes of an organization as components, steps, or data flows within a model so that current business processes can be analyzed, automated, optimized, engineered, or extended GUI 152 may provide interactive elements that allow a user to enter, modify, select, or model elements of business process instances in GUI 152. A view of a process model based on the user's role within a business organization may be presented and accessible to the user through GUI a view generated for a process analyst can include a process fragment that receives events or interacts exclusively with a particular business process. Views can also be generated with respect to user roles 308 and relationships to organizational hierarchy levels, such as whether an event is associated with process/task administrators, potential or excluded owners of certain user tasks, or notification recipients"; paragraphs 12, 37, 53).
However, Balko does not specifically teach a virtual agent that loads at least one model related to one or more processes of an organization; determining that the process request changes an atomic dialog definition of a plurality of atomic dialog definitions associated with the one or more processes of the organization; and retraining the atomic dialogue definition based upon the process request without retraining the plurality of atomic dialog definitions.
Chen et al. disclose that the PIA 212 or PIA 222 may be incorporated into a virtual information system platform 230 incorporated into the business organization's computing network and may be powered by one or more artificial intelligence algorithms
(e.g., a neural network, fuzzy logic engine, etc.) (paragraph 35, lines 5 - 7) machine learning models may be used to model a process based on instances or illustrative examples of training data to build a representative database of information, such that input data may be compared to the model data to identify similarities and/or find a best match in determining a prediction (paragraph 36, lines 5 - 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to load a model related to one or more processes of an organization as taught by Chen et al. in Balko, because that would help improve the user's experience with electronic interactions with an organization's computing systems (paragraph 37).
However, Balko in view of Chen et al. do not specifically teach determining that the process request changes an atomic dialog definition of a plurality of atomic dialog definitions associated with the one or more processes of the organization; and retraining the atomic dialogue definition based upon the process request without retraining the plurality of atomic dialog definitions.
Kishimoto et al. disclose dialog systems can play a key role in the functioning of an organization, such as a business, government, group or other entity. For example, many critical decisions may result from discussions in chat systems, or chat-like conversation systems or chatbots. A chatbot may be an operation which conducts a dialog or conversation, audible, visual, and/or via textual methods. Organizations may seek to capture and analyze these decisions to make various improvements to a structure of the organization (paragraph 18). The learning component 408 may be a machine learning component for training and learning one or more machine learning models and also for learning, applying inferences, and/or reasoning pertaining to one or more domains, concepts, features, problems and relationships between the domains, or a combination thereof to the machine learning model for the dialog manager 406 (paragraph 78).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to retrain atomic dialogue definition based upon the process request as taught by Kishimoto et al. in Chen et al. in view of Balko, because that would help provide improvements to a structure of the organization (paragraph 18).
As per claims 2, 9, and 16, Balko in view of Chen et al., and further in view of Kishimoto et al. further disclose that the set of structure definitions refers to a structure definitions library, and wherein the structure definitions library further comprises at least one of a user role in the organization, a user responsibility in the organization, roles definitions, organization chart, access rights, and an instance state context ("The algorithms used to automatically detect blocks within the process model, however, may not utilize process metadata to derive semantically coherent blocks that are aligned with the user's role or organizational hierarchy level. Accordingly, process metadata categories associated with the user are determined based on the role of the user at 515. In some instances, the role of the user can be determined through a company's org chart, and the process metadata associated with the user role can be identified through a lookup table"; Balko; paragraph 56, last six lines).
As per claims 3, 10, and 17, Balko in view of Chen et al., and further in view of Kishimoto et al. further disclose that the one or more of procedures and protocols is included in a set of behavior definitions that refer to a behavior definitions library, and wherein the behavior definitions library comprises the plurality of atomic dialog definitions, wherein each atomic dialog definition of the plurality of atomic dialog definitions corresponds to at least one codec element ("Each PIA may include a natural language processing (NLP) engine 407a-c, or may be linked to a central NLP engine 427, for receiving user inputs from the user 205 that may be processed by an automatic speech recognition algorithm and may be processed by the natural language processing engine 407a-c to translate the speech input into concepts that can be easily parsed and understood by the virtual information assistants"; Chen et al., paragraphs 41, 50).
As per claims 4, 11, and 18, Balko in view of Chen et al., and further in view of Kishimoto et al. further disclose that the at least one codec element encapsulates one of audio enhancement, automatic speech recognition (ASR), natural language understanding (NLU), natural language generation (NLG), text-to-speech (TTS), and dialog manager (DM) ["Each PIA may include a natural language processing (NLP) engine 407a-c, or may be linked to a central NLP engine 427, for receiving user inputs from the user 205 that may be processed by an automatic speech recognition algorithm and may be processed by the natural language processing engine 407a-c to translate the speech input into concepts that can be easily parsed and understood by the virtual information assistants"; Chen et al., paragraphs 41, 50].
As per claims 5, 12, and 19, Balko in view of Chen et al., and further in view of Kishimoto et al. further disclose that at least one of: the plurality of atomic dialog definitions are parameterizable; and the behavior definitions library comprises sub-processes related to the one or more processes of the organization (Balko, paragraph 35; Chen et al., paragraphs 41, 50, 57).
As per claims 6, 13, and 20, Balko in view of Chen et al., and further in view of Kishimoto et al. further disclose using a security interface to limit access to process data when the user of the organization lacks process rights in user responsibility in the organization to execute the process request, wherein the process rights are based on a profile of the user of the organization ("providing automatic identification of semantically coherent, user-aligned fragments in business process models. Business process management (BPM) can include representing processes of an organization as components, steps, or data flows within a model so that current business processes can be analyzed, automated, optimized, engineered, or extended GUI 152 may provide interactive elements that allow a user to enter, modify, select, or model elements of business process instances in GUI 152. A view of a process model based on the user's role within a business organization may be presented and accessible to the user through GUI a view generated for a process analyst can include a process fragment that receives events or interacts exclusively with a particular business process. Views can also be generated with respect to user roles 308 and relationships to organizational hierarchy levels, such as whether an event is associated with process/task administrators, potential or excluded owners of certain user tasks, or notification recipients"; Balko; paragraphs 12, 37, 53).
As per claims 7, 14, Balko in view of Chen et al., and further in view of Kishimoto et al. further disclose that the security interface is further configured to at least one of access rights, the process rights, distribute rights, communicate rights, and execute rights ("relationships to organizational hierarchy levels, such as whether an event is associated with process/task administrators, potential or excluded owners of certain user tasks, or notification recipients."; Balko; paragraphs 20, 53).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEONARD SAINT-CYR whose telephone number is (571)272-4247. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday.
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, Richemond Dorvil can be reached at (571)272-7602. 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.
/LEONARD SAINT-CYR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2658
