CTNF 18/966,122 CTNF 96219 DETAILED ACTION Introduction 1. This office action is in response to Applicant’s submission filed on 12/3/2024. Claims 1-5 are pending in the application and have been examined. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement 3. The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 12/3/2024 and 5/7/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 4. 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 5. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as anticipated by U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 20210398527 (Xia). With regard to Claim 1, Xia describes: “An information processing apparatus comprising a controller configured to, upon detecting an utterance that satisfies an utterance condition set in advance, activate a voice assistant function and output a response to a content of the utterance, even if a keyword for activating the voice assistant function is not detected.” Paragraph 14 of Xia describes a voice assistant that performs a voice command that is received without first receiving a keyword/wakeword before activating the voice assistant. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 6. 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. 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, 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. 7. Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Xia in view of U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 20180322300 (Segal et al., hereinafter “Segal”). With regard to Claim 2, Xia does not explicitly describe this subject matter. However, Segal describes “the utterance condition is a condition that a user who has uttered the utterance has a predetermined attribute set in advance and the content of the utterance of the user is a predetermined content set in advance.” Paragraph 39 of Segal describes that the device includes templates for the expected content of the command set in advance. Paragraph 40 of Segal describes that the device may store the identity of the user in advance, such as a child making the utterance. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the user attributes as described by Segal into the system of Xia to specialize commands for certain users, as described in paragraph 40 of Segal. With regard to Claim 3, Xia does not explicitly describe this subject matter. However, Segal describes “the predetermined attribute is a child.” Paragraph 40 of Segal describes that the device may store the identity of the user in advance, such as a child making the utterance. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the user attributes as described by Segal into the system of Xia to specialize commands for certain users, as described in paragraph 40 of Segal. 8. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Xia in view of Segal and further in view of U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 20220020374 (BEN ABDELAZIZ, hereinafter “Ben”). With regard to Claim 4, Xia in view of Segal does not explicitly describe this subject matter. However, Ben describes “the predetermined content is a content with high urgency of activating the voice assistant function in an interior of a vehicle.” Paragraph 38 of Ben describes activating a personal assistant in a vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vehicle assistant as described by Ben into the system of Xia in view of Segal to provide virtual assistant help in a vehicle, as described in paragraph 38 of Ben. 9. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Xia in view of Segal Ben and further in view of U.S. Pat. App. Pub. No. 20180090136 (Connell et al., hereinafter “Can”). With regard to Claim 5, Xia in view of Segal and Ben does not explicitly describe this subject matter. However, Connell describes “the predetermined content is a content of a request to go to a restroom.” Paragraph 27 of Can describes that a personal assistant can respond to a request for a restroom. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the bathroom request as described by Con into the system of Xia in view of Segal and Ben to provide virtual assistant help in finding a restroom, as described in paragraph 27 of Can. Conclusion 07-96 AIA 10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. WIPO App. Pub. No. 2021020877 (Lee et al.) describes a device that provides avoice assistant to a user. 11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD TRACY whose telephone number is (571)272-8332. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 AM- 5PM. 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, Bhavesh Mehta can be reached on 571-272-7453. 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. /EDWARD TRACY JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2656 Application/Control Number: 18/966,122 Page 2 Art Unit: 2656 Application/Control Number: 18/966,122 Page 3 Art Unit: 2656 Application/Control Number: 18/966,122 Page 4 Art Unit: 2656 Application/Control Number: 18/966,122 Page 5 Art Unit: 2656 Application/Control Number: 18/966,122 Page 6 Art Unit: 2656
Prosecution Insights