Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to application 18/954,245 which was filed 11/20/24. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application and have been considered.
Foreign Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Data Processing Method, Device, and Storage Medium for Receiving a Target Message, Obtaining Target Information, and Displaying a Reply Message.
Drawings
Figure 3 is objected to because the text labels of elements S306, S307, S310, and S312 appears to be inadvertently intersected by the directional arrows adjacent to the text, making the text labels difficult to read (as opposed to labels S302, S303, and S309 which appear to be properly illustrated).
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.
Claims 1-4, 10, 11, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites “receiving a target message for a target object in a target session, wherein the target message comprises a keyword set; obtaining target information of the target object according to the keyword set, wherein the target information matches keywords in the keyword set; displaying a reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session”.
The limitation of receiving a target message for a target object in a target session, wherein the target message comprises a keyword set, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “receiving a target message for a target object in a target session, wherein the target message comprises a keyword set” in the context of this claim encompasses reading a target message for a target object in a target session, wherein the target message comprises a keyword set.
Similarly, the limitation of “obtaining target information of the target object according to the keyword set, wherein the target information matches keywords in the keyword set”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “obtaining target information of the target object according to the keyword set, wherein the target information matches keywords in the keyword set” in the context of this claim encompasses mentally obtaining target information of the target object according to the keyword set, wherein the target information matches keywords in the keyword set.
Similarly, the limitation of “displaying a reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session”, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. For example, “displaying a reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session” in the context of this claim encompasses writing a reply message which contains the target information on a sheet of paper and holding it up for display.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim does not recite any additional elements that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application by imposing 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. The claim is not patent eligible.
Specifically with respect to Step 2A, Prong Two, of the Alice/Mayo test, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 does not recite any limitations that are not mental steps.
Specifically with respect to Step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test, “the claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself (there is no inventive concept in the claim)”. MPEP 2106.05 Il. There are no limitations in claim 1 outside of the judicial exception. As a whole, there does not appear to contain any inventive concept. As discussed above, claim 1 is a mental process that pertains to the mental process of receiving a target message, obtaining information, and displaying a reply message, which can be performed entirely by a human with physical aids.
Dependent claims 2-14 depend from claim 1, do not remedy any of the deficiencies of claim 1, and therefore are rejected on the same grounds as claim 1 above.
Generally, claims 2-4, 10, and 11 merely recite additional steps for receiving a target message, obtaining information, and displaying a reply message, all of which could be performed mentally or by writing down relationships with a pen and paper, and do not amount to anything more than substantially the same abstract idea as explained with respect to claim 1.
Specifically:
Claim 2 recites “the keyword set comprises overview keywords and/or index keywords” which could be performed by reading a message with a keyword set that comprises overview keywords and/or index keywords.
Claim 3 recites “the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the keyword set comprises: obtaining overview information of the target object according to the overview keywords, wherein the overview information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: basic work information, work content, work ability and work performance; or, obtaining index information of the target object according to the index keywords, wherein the index information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: personnel information, performance information, recruitment information, OKR information and salary information” which could be performed by mentally obtaining overview information of the target object according to the overview keywords, wherein the overview information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: basic work information, work content, work ability and work performance; or, obtaining index information of the target object according to the index keywords, wherein the index information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: personnel information, performance information, recruitment information, OKR information and salary information.
Claim 4 recites “the displaying the reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session comprises: displaying a graph, a table and/or an information card in the reply message, wherein the graph, the table and/or the information card are generated based on the overview information or the index information” which could be performed by mentally drawing a graph, table, or information card in the reply message and holding it up for display.
Claim 10 recites “the keyword set further comprises a second keyword, and the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the target keyword comprises: querying, according to the second keyword, to obtain accurate information of the target object, wherein the target information further comprises the accurate information” which could be performed by mentally searching for accurate information of the target object using a second keyword.
Claim 11 recites “the target information comprises identification information of the target object” which could be performed by mentally obtaining the target information comprising identification information of the target object.
In sum, claims 2-4, 10, and 11 depend from claim 1 and further recite mental processes as explained above. None of the additional limitations recited in claims 2-4, 10, and 11 amount to anything more than the same or a similar abstract idea as recited in claim 1. Nor do any limitations in claims 2-4, 10, and 11 (a) integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or (b) amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claims 2-4, 10, and 11 are not patent eligible.
Claim 15 is directed to an electronic device that corresponds to the method of claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons set for the above with respect to claim 1. While claim 15 recites generic computer components (one or more processors, a storage apparatus storing one or more programs), such generic computing components are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor executing a generic computer program) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits 15 practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Claim 15 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 limitations of using generic computer components amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Claim 15 is not patent eligible.
Claims 16-18 depend from claim 15, do not remedy any of the deficiencies of claim 15, and contain subject matter which corresponds to that addressed above in claims 2-4, and therefore are rejected on the same grounds as claims 15 and 2-4 above.
Claim 20 is directed to a non-transient computer-readable storage medium that corresponds to the system of claim 15 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons set forth above with respect to claim 15. Moreover, while claim 20 recites generic computing components (non-transient computer-readable storage medium, processor, program), such components are only claimed at a high-level of generality and are not sufficient to render the claim subject matter eligible for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 15.
Eligible Claims
Claim 5 recites “the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the keyword set comprises: sending intention diffusion information to a first model, wherein the intention diffusion information is obtained according to a first keyword in the keyword set; receiving intention diffusion result information sent by the first model, wherein the intention diffusion result information comprises at least one diffusion keyword, and the diffusion keyword is obtained by performing intention diffusion on the first keyword; querying, according to the at least one diffusion keyword, to obtain diffusion information of the target object, wherein the target information comprises the diffusion information” which cannot be practically performed as a mental process.
Claims 6-9 depend on and include the limitations of claim 5 above and so also cannot be practically performed as a mental process.
Claim 12 recites “determining at least one candidate object according to the identification information; sending object confirmation request information to a client terminal, wherein the object confirmation request information is obtained according to information of the at least one candidate object; obtaining object confirmation response information sent by the client terminal, wherein the object confirmation response information indicates the target object; determining the target object according to the object confirmation response information” which cannot be practically performed as a mental process.
Claim 13 recites “the target information comprises object retrieval information; the method further comprises: sending intention parse information to a second model, wherein the intention parse information is generated based on the object retrieval information; receiving intention information sent by the second model, wherein the intention information is determined according to the object retrieval information; determining the target object according to the intention information, wherein information of the target object matches the intention information” which cannot be practically performed as a mental process.
Claim 14 recites “after obtaining the target information of the target object and before displaying the reply message, the method further comprises: sending object summary information to a third model, wherein the object summary information is obtained according to the target information of the target object; receiving object summary response information sent by the third model, wherein the object summary response information comprises summarized target information of the target object; generating the reply message according to the summarized target information of the target object” which cannot be practically performed as a mental process.
Claim 19 recites subject matter similar to claim 5 which cannot be practically performed as a mental process.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheopuri et al. (US 20200334580) in view of Jeong et al. (US 20240015117).
Consider claim 1, Sheopuri discloses a data processing method (data processing apparatus implements methods, [0160-0162]), comprising:
receiving a target message for a target object in a target session, wherein the target message comprises a keyword set (receiving a user query for personal information about an employee name during a chat with AcmePay Advisor AI assistant, and identifying the entities and keywords for each query, [0119], [0121]-[0123], Fig. 8B, Fig. 5E, e.g. “When was Jane Doe last promoted”);
obtaining target information of the target object according to the keyword set, (using intents, entities, and keywords to generate an SQL database query which retrieves information, [0119]-[0123]);
displaying a reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session (e.g. “The promotion date of Jane Doe is 2017-06-30”, Fig 5E, [0104]).
Sheopuri does not specifically mention the target information matches keywords in the keyword set.
Jeong discloses target information matches keywords in a keyword set (information matching keywords extracted from the user question, [0117]-[0121], Fig 13, [0065-0067]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sheopuri such that the target information matches keywords in the keyword set in order to improve accuracy of chatbot responses, as suggested by Jeong ([0004]). Doing so would have led to predictable results of improving manager convenience, as suggested by Jeong ([0005]). The references cited are analogous art in the same field of natural language processing.
Consider claim 15, Sheopuri discloses an electronic device (computer, [0065]), comprising: one or more processors (processor, [0065]); a storage apparatus, storing one or more programs thereon, wherein the one or more programs, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to realize a data processing method (programs are stored on memory and executed by processor, [0065]), comprising:
receiving a target message for a target object in a target session, wherein the target message comprises a keyword set (receiving a user query for personal information about an employee name during a chat with AcmePay Advisor AI assistant, and identifying the entities and keywords for each query, [0119], [0121]-[0123], Fig. 8B, Fig. 5E, e.g. “When was Jane Doe last promoted”);
obtaining target information of the target object according to the keyword set, (using intents, entities, and keywords to generate an SQL database query which retrieves information, [0119]-[0123]);
displaying a reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session (e.g. “The promotion date of Jane Doe is 2017-06-30”, Fig 5E, [0104]).
Sheopuri does not specifically mention the target information matches keywords in the keyword set.
Jeong discloses target information matches keywords in a keyword set (information matching keywords extracted from the user question, [0117]-[0121], Fig 13, [0065-0067]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sheopuri such that the target information matches keywords in the keyword set in order to improve accuracy of chatbot responses, as suggested by Jeong ([0004]). Doing so would have led to predictable results of improving manager convenience, as suggested by Jeong ([0005]). The references cited are analogous art in the same field of natural language processing.
Consider claim 20, Sheopuri discloses a non-transient computer-readable storage medium, wherein a computer program is stored thereon, wherein the program, when executed by a processor, realizes a data processing method (programs are stored on memory and executed by processor, [0065]), comprising: receiving a target message for a target object in a target session, wherein the target message comprises a keyword set; obtaining target information of the target object according to the keyword set, wherein the target information matches keywords in the keyword set; displaying a reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session.
Consider claim 2, Sheopuri discloses the keyword set comprises overview keywords and/or index keywords (resolving keywords related to employee profile information, employee history information, skills, salary, etc., [0119]-[0123], Fig 5B, [0089]).
Consider claim 3, Sheopuri discloses the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the keyword set comprises:
obtaining overview information of the target object according to the overview keywords, wherein the overview information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: basic work information, work content, work ability and work performance (information in employee profile including skills, Fig. 5B, [0089); or,
obtaining index information of the target object according to the index keywords,
wherein the index information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: personnel information, performance information, recruitment information, OKR information and salary information (information in employee history including salary information, [0089], Fig 5B).
Consider claim 4, Sheopuri discloses the displaying the reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session comprises: displaying a graph, a table and/or an information card in the reply message, wherein the graph, the table and/or the information card are generated based on the overview information or the index information (generating and displaying a table of salary information and suggested increases, Fig 5A, [0101]).
Consider claim 5, Sheopuri discloses the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the keyword set comprises:
sending intention diffusion information to a first model, wherein the intention diffusion information is obtained according to a first keyword in the keyword set (queries are sent to a natural language understanding model which computes underlying intent and resolves entities and keywords, which are passed to orchestration model, [0119]; whether the query is intended for personal information or generic information is determined based on the keywords, and is considered intention diffusion information since multiple intents exist within each intent class, [0121]);
receiving intention diffusion result information sent by the first model, wherein the intention diffusion result information comprises at least one diffusion keyword, and the diffusion keyword is obtained by performing intention diffusion on the first keyword (determining, for example that the query is a request for information specifically on “promotion”, which is a diffusion of personal information, [0119]-[0123], Fig 5E, [0104]);
querying, according to the at least one diffusion keyword, to obtain diffusion information of the target object, wherein the target information comprises the diffusion information (querying the database for promotion information, which is a diffusion of personal information, [0119]-[0123], Fig 5E, [0104]).
Consider claim 6, Sheopuri discloses the querying, according to the at least one diffusion keyword, to obtain the diffusion information of the target object comprises: obtaining the diffusion information of the target object from an information source corresponding to the diffusion keyword (obtaining promotion information from the database, [0119]-[0123], Fig 5E, [0104]).
Consider claim 7, Sheopuri discloses the reply message further comprises a reference region, and the reference region is used to display the diffusion information of the target object (the user may refer to the text box used to display “The promotion date of Jane Doe is 2017-06-30”, Fig 5E, [0104]).
Consider claim 8, Sheopuri discloses the reference region comprises at least one diffusion information selected from a group consisting of: personnel information, performance information, recruitment information, OKR information and salary information (promotion information being personnel information, Fig 5E, [0104], also displaying salary information such as in Fig 5A, [0100]).
Consider claim 9, Sheopuri discloses: displaying, in response to a first trigger operation on the diffusion information of the reference region, a content of the diffusion information in the target session; or, invoking, in response to a second trigger operation on the diffusion information of the reference region, an information page of the information source of the diffusion information, and displaying the content of the diffusion information on the information page (the ongoing chat between AI AcmePay Advisor shows the user asking questions pertaining to the replies shown in the AI text boxes, Fig 5E, [0104]; the user questions considered “trigger” operations since they trigger a response, the response regarding diffusion information such as personal information, [0119]-[0123], Fig 5E, [0104]).
Consider claim 10, Sheopuri discloses the keyword set further comprises a second keyword, and the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the target keyword comprises: querying, according to the second keyword, to obtain accurate information of the target object, wherein the target information further comprises the accurate information (keywords, plural, are used to generate an SQL database query which retrieves information matching the identified keywords, [0119]-[0123], the information considered “accurate” in that it is faithful to what is in the database).
Consider claim 11, Sheopuri discloses the target information comprises identification information of the target object (employee profile data, Fig 5B, [0101]).
Consider claim 12, Sheopuri discloses:
determining at least one candidate object according to the identification information (determining matching names using the intents, entities, and keywords, [0123]);
sending object confirmation request information to a client terminal, wherein the object confirmation request information is obtained according to information of the at least one candidate object (querying back to the user when multiple names match to disambiguate, [0123]); obtaining object confirmation response information sent by the client terminal, wherein the object confirmation response information indicates the target object (user clarifies the exact individual, [0123], on user interface, [0125]); determining the target object according to the object confirmation response information (the individual or list of individuals is determined, [0123]).
Consider claim 13, Sheopuri discloses the target information comprises object retrieval information (keywords used to retrieve information, [0119]-[0123]); the method further comprises:
sending intention parse information to a second model, wherein the intention parse information is generated based on the object retrieval information (analyzing the query including keywords to determine whether the query is intended for personal information or generic information is determined based on the keywords, considered a second classification model, [0119], [0121]); receiving intention information sent by the second model, wherein the intention information is determined according to the object retrieval information (determining the query is intended for personal information or generic information is determined based on the keywords, [0119], [0121]);
determining the target object according to the intention information, wherein information of the target object matches the intention information (retrieving either the personal information or generic information, Fig 8B, [0119]-[0121]).
Consider claim 16, Sheopuri discloses the keyword set comprises overview keywords and/or index keywords (resolving keywords related to employee profile information, employee history information, skills, salary, etc., [0119]-[0123], Fig 5B, [0089]).
Consider claim 17, Sheopuri discloses the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the keyword set comprises:
obtaining overview information of the target object according to the overview keywords, wherein the overview information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: basic work information, work content, work ability and work performance (information in employee profile including skills, Fig. 5B, [0089); or,
obtaining index information of the target object according to the index keywords,
wherein the index information comprises at least one selected from a group consisting of: personnel information, performance information, recruitment information, OKR information and salary information (information in employee history including salary information, [0089], Fig 5B).
Consider claim 18, Sheopuri discloses the displaying the reply message, which contains the target information, in the target session comprises: displaying a graph, a table and/or an information card in the reply message, wherein the graph, the table and/or the information card are generated based on the overview information or the index information (generating and displaying a table of salary information and suggested increases, Fig 5A, [0101]).
Consider claim 19, Sheopuri discloses the obtaining the target information of the target object according to the keyword set comprises:
sending intention diffusion information to a first model, wherein the intention diffusion information is obtained according to a first keyword in the keyword set (queries are sent to a natural language understanding model which computes underlying intent and resolves entities and keywords, which are passed to orchestration model, [0119]; whether the query is intended for personal information or generic information is determined based on the keywords, and is considered intention diffusion information since multiple intents exist within each intent class, [0121]);
receiving intention diffusion result information sent by the first model, wherein the intention diffusion result information comprises at least one diffusion keyword, and the diffusion keyword is obtained by performing intention diffusion on the first keyword (determining, for example that the query is a request for information specifically on “promotion”, which is a diffusion of personal information, [0119]-[0123], Fig 5E, [0104]);
querying, according to the at least one diffusion keyword, to obtain diffusion information of the target object, wherein the target information comprises the diffusion information (querying the database for promotion information, which is a diffusion of personal information, [0119]-[0123], Fig 5E, [0104]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheopuri et al. (US 20200334580) in view of Jeong et al. (US 20240015117), in further view of Oliveira et al. (US 20220076283).
Consider claim 14, Sheopuri discloses after obtaining the target information of the target object and before displaying the reply message (after a target entity has been determined, but before the response is generated, [0124]), the method further comprises: sending object information to a third model, wherein the object information is obtained according to the target information of the target object (querying a question bank, considered a “third model”, [0124]); receiving object response information sent by the third model, wherein the object response information comprises target information of the target object (retrieving a response from the question bank, [0124]); generating the reply message according to the target information of the target object (UI displays response to the user, [0124]).
Sheopuri and Jeong do not specifically mention object summary information and summarized target information.
Oliveira discloses object summary information and summarized target information (artificial intelligence component summarizes relevant information and sends the report to chatbot manager, [0066]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sheopuri by including object summary information and summarized target information in order to facilitate generating possible solutions to address employee issues and improve or adjust resources, as suggested by Oliveira ([0051]). Doing so would have led to predictable results improved employee mental state and engagement, as suggested by Oliveira ([0051]). The references cited are analogous art in the same field of natural language processing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20190019160 Champaneria discloses managing, matching, and sourcing employment candidates in a recruitment campaign
US 11960514 Taylert discloses interactive conversation assistance using semantic search and generative AI
US 20230259541 Ost discloses an intelligent assistant for conversational job search
US 20240394502 Sami discloses a customized chatbot using AI for action recommendation based on intents
US 20190042988 Brown discloses an omnichannel, intelligent, proactive virtual agent that assist a user by engaging in a conversation about enterprise data
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jesse Pullias whose telephone number is 571/270-5135. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM. The examiner’s fax number is 571/270-6135.
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, Andrew Flanders can be reached on 571/272-7516.
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.
/Jesse S Pullias/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2655 07/08/26
Prosecution Insights