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
Response to Amendment
This communication is in response to the amendment filed on 12/11/2025 for the application No. 18/969,517, Claims 1, 4-12, 15-18 and 21 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1, 4-12, 15-18 and 21 have been rejected.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. Applicant filed certified patent document, Application number 2016-011663 on 04/23/2018 on parent case 15/770,297. However, a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 12 and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9 and 17 of Patent No. 12,182,833. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claim anticipates the claims under examination.
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of Patent No. 12,182,833. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claim anticipates the claims under examination.
Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of Patent No. 12,182,833. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claim anticipates the claims under examination.
Claim 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of Patent No. 12,182,833. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claim anticipates the claims under examination.
Claim 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of Patent No. 12,182,833. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claim anticipates the claims under examination.
Claim 11 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of Patent No. 12,182,833. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference claim anticipates the claims under examination.
Examiner’s Note
Regarding to 101 compliance, Claims 1, 4-12, 15-18 and 21 are compliant with 101, according with the last "2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance" (2019 PEG), published in the MPEP 2103 through 2106.07(c). Examiner’s analysis is presented below in all the claims:
Claim 1: Step 1 of 2019 PGE, does the claim fall within a Statutory Category? Yes. The claim recites an apparatus (a system).
Step 2A - Prong 1: Is a Judicial Exception recited in the claim? Yes.
The claim recites the limitations of “identify a piece of advertisement stored … as targeting a user according to a preference of the user, generate a first piece of … data based on text information stored in the storage in association with the piece of advertisement, generate a second piece of … data for presenting content of the piece of advertisement to the user based on a reaction to the first piece of … data by the user”
The “identify, generate” limitations, as drafted, is a process and system that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations as certain methods of organizing human activity, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors. The system for proposing advertisements to users on the internet. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application? Yes. The claim recites additional limitations, such as, “transmit the first piece … data …, transmit the second piece of …”. And the Examiner analyses other supplementary elements in the claim in view of the instant disclosure: “processing circuitry configured to, in a first storage, in a second storage, vocalized speech, to a client terminal of the user, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the reaction based on a relationship between the piece of advertisement and content of a dialogue session with the client terminal of the user; over a communication network”.
The claim as a whole integrates the apparatus of organizing human activity into a practical application. Specifically, the additional limitations recite a specific apparatus for proposing advertisements to users on the internet. Also the claim as a whole reflect the improvement described in the background, “ The communication control system according to the embodiment helps the user in his or her daily life using the agent 10, as described above, and determines whether the user is a potential customer of a predetermined product, that is, whether the user is a customer who expresses interest in the predetermined product. Then, in a case in which the user is a potential customer, an advertisement effect can be improved by causing the agent 10 to output a guidance message and encourage the user to purchase a product”, paragraph 19. “ In this way, by guiding the user so that his or her interest is aroused with dialogue with the agent 10 that regularly assists the user and then presenting an advertised product, compared to an Internet advertisement method of presenting advertisement information to the user at the beginning through a popup advertisement or an advertisement banner displayed while the user browses a web site, a potential request of the user can be aroused naturally, and thus an improvement in the advertisement effect is expected”, paragraph 21. Thus, the claim as a whole is eligible because is not directed to the recited judicial exception (abstract idea).
Step 2B : claim provides an inventive concept? n/a
Claim 12: Step 1 of 2019 PGE, does the claim fall within a Statutory Category? Yes. The claim recites a method.
Step 2A - Prong 1: Is a Judicial Exception recited in the claim ? Yes. Because the same reasons pointed above.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application? Yes. Because the same reasons pointed above. The claim is eligible.
Claim 18: Step 1 of 2019 PGE, does the claim fall within a Statutory Category? Yes. The claim recites a computer-readable medium.
Step 2A - Prong 1: Is a Judicial Exception recited in the claim ? Yes. Because the same reasons pointed above.
Step 2A - Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Application? Yes. Because the same reasons pointed above. The claim is eligible.
Dependent claims 4-11, 15-17, and 21, the claims recite elements such as “ wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to transmit the first piece of vocalized speech data or the second piece of vocalized speech data based on a probability
factor stored in the first storage associated with the piece of advertisement”, etc. These elements integrate the system of organizing human activity into a practical application. The claims are eligible.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-8, 12, 15-18 and 21are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG. Pub. No. 20150134456 ( BALDWIN) in view of US PG. Pub. No. 20120164613 (Jung).
As to claims 1, 12 and 18, BALDWIN discloses
An information processing apparatus, comprising: processing circuitry configured to: (see at least paragraph 17; paragraph 23; paragraphs 28-29, Fig. 1 and associated disclosure),
a) identify a piece of advertisement stored in a first storage as targeting a user
according to a preference of the user stored in a second storage,
(“…digital assistants may act as a direct and/or indirect source of user information for advertisers”, paragraph 10.
“…In another embodiment, avatars 190, 192 can be provided by the digital assistants 150, 152 to facilitate the communication exchanges with users of the devices. The avatars 190, 192 can be of various type including avatars that are depicted to resemble the users or resemble someone according to user preferences”, paragraph 17; paragraph 23; paragraph 28-29.
“[0017] Each of the devices 110, 112 can have a digital assistant 150, 152, respectively. The digital assistants 150, 152 can each have a digital assistant persona 170, 172 which can control information that is provided by the digital assistants during communication exchanges. In one or more embodiment, the control by the digital assistant persona can be the policies or rules applied by the digital assistant with respect to obtaining information and/or presenting the information. In another embodiment, avatars 190, 192 can be provided by the digital assistants 150, 152 to facilitate the communication exchanges with users of the devices. The avatars 190, 192 can be of various type including avatars that are depicted to resemble the users or resemble someone according to user preferences [Examiner interprets as a preference of the user stored in a second storage]”, paragraph 17.
“10. A computer readable storage device [a first storage ] comprising executable instructions which, responsive to being executed by a processor of a first communication device, cause the processor to perform operations comprising: providing a first digital assistant to engage in a first communication exchange with a user of the first communication device, wherein the first digital assistant has a first digital assistant persona that controls information provided by the first digital assistant during communication exchanges that include the first communication exchange; analyzing user input received during the first communication exchange; determining a user deficiency based on the analyzing of the user input; providing an acceptance of a promotional offer to a marketing system,…”, claim 10),
b) generate a first piece of vocalized speech data based on text information stored
in the first storage in association with the piece of advertisement,
(“[0019] In one embodiment, the digital assistant persona 170 can be adjusted to mirror the user 130. For instance, the device 110 can adapt the digital assistant persona 170 to mimic that of user 130. This can include mimicking or otherwise presenting one or more of similar speech patterns, vocabulary, audio pitch, audio volume, and so forth…”, paragraph 19.
“0030] In one embodiment, the analyzing of the user input includes an analysis of speech patterns and/or vocabulary, such as of audio content and/or text that is provided as user input by the user to the first communication device during the first communication exchange. The analysis can be performed utilizing various techniques, including speech recognition, natural language synthesis, and so forth. Various libraries, including local and/or remote libraries can be accessed to facilitate the analysis of the user input….”, paragraph 30.
“[0045] Communication system 400 can also provide for all or a portion of the computing devices 430 to function as a marketing system or server or a network server (herein referred to as server 430). The server 430 can use computing and communication technology to perform function 462, which can include among other things, generating promotional offers and managing acceptances of those promotional offers by digital assistants; providing marketing information to be utilized (e.g., interwoven) during a communication exchange; providing incentives to the user based on the promotional offers and forth. In other embodiments, the server 430 can facilitate the adjustment of the digital assistant persona, such as remotely performing: analysis of user input, detection of user persona, detection of user deficiency; image pattern recognition, speech pattern recognition, and so forth”, paragraph 45.
“[0049] In one embodiment, the device 500 can provide an acceptance of a promotional offer to a marketing system. The promotional offer can be based on a benefit being provided by the marketing system in exchange for presentation of marketing information by the first digital assistant. The adjusting of the digital assistant persona can cause the digital assistant to present the marketing information in a response during the communication exchange. The analyzing of the user input can include an analysis of speech patterns and vocabulary….”, paragraph 49);
c) transmit, over a communication network, the first piece of vocalized speech data to a client terminal of the user,
(“As one non-limiting example, information specifying the virtual assistant persona may specify a voice font and/or speaking style and the virtual assistant may adopt the virtual assistant persona by generating speech in accordance with the voice font and/or speaking style….”, paragraph 46.
“[0064] In some embodiments, the virtual assistant may perform a user-specified action (e.g., send an e-mail including a link to the weather forecast to my spouse, ring an alarm, etc.) at least in part by using another application program (e.g., an e-mail application program, an alarm application program, etc.) when a corresponding user-specified condition has been met (e.g., when the weather forecast includes rain, when the price of a particular stock falls below a threshold, etc.). In other embodiments, a virtual assistant need not use one or more other application programs to perform the action, as some user-specified actions (e.g., provide information to the user by generating speech) may be performed by the virtual assistant on its own, paragraph 64);
d) generate[ a second ] piece of vocalized speech data for presenting content of the piece of advertisement to the user based on a reaction to the first piece of vocalized speech data by the user,
(“…the depiction of the mood or behavior trait can be in reaction to a detected mood or behavior of the user…”, paragraph 28.
“…The determination of the user persona can be based on the analyzing of the user input. At 308, a determination can be made, by the first communication device, as to a user deficiency. The determination of the user deficiency can be based on the analyzing of the user input. At 310, the first communication device can receive a promotional offer from a marketing system. In one embodiment, the promotional offer can be based on a benefit being provided by the marketing system in exchange for presentation of marketing information by the first digital assistant. The first communication device can provide an acceptance of the promotional offer to the marketing system. …”, paragraph 29 and Fig. 3 and associated disclosure
“[0068] FIG. 6 depicts an exemplary diagrammatic representation of a machine in the form of a computer system 600 within which a set of instructions, when executed, may cause the machine to perform any one or more of the methods describe above. One or more instances of the machine can operate, for example, as the devices 110, 112, the system 120, the server 430, the media processor 406, the wireless devices 416 and other devices described herein. The machine can perform digital assistant persona adjustments based on the various information described herein including user persona, user deficiency, promotional offers, behavioral trait analysis, audio content analysis, image analysis and so forth. [Examiner interprets as vocalized speech data for presenting content of the piece of advertisement to the user based on a reaction] The machine can also engage in the sharing or providing of the various information described above…”, paragraph 68),
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the
reaction based on a relationship between the piece of advertisement and content of dialogue session with the client terminal of the user
(“…The digital assistants can provide various information to a user based on questions posed by the user, such as the name of a restaurant, sporting event scores, and so forth”, paragraph 2.
“..the advertising or marketing information is provided by the digital assistant 150 as a response to a question being posed by the user 130”, paragraph 21.
“…the marketing information can be presented in the response as an answer to a question posed by the user during the first communication exchange”, paragraph 34.
“…adjusting of the first digital assistant persona causes the first digital assistant to present the marketing information in a response [reaction] during the first communication exchange, where the adjusting of the first digital assistant persona causes the first digital assistant to present deficiency information during the first communication exchange that is selected by the first digital assistant based on the user deficiency, and where the deficiency information is associated with a subject matter that is determined by the processor to be unknown to the user. Function 464 can also include determining a user persona of the user based on the analyzing of the user input, where the adjusting of the first digital assistant persona is based on the user persona, and where the analyzing of the user input includes an analysis of speech patterns and vocabulary…”, paragraph 46.
“…response during the communication exchange. The analyzing of the user input can include an analysis of speech patterns and vocabulary. …”, paragraph 49 and claim 19.
See also , “[0010] The subject disclosure describes, among other things, illustrative embodiments for enabling one or more digital assistant personas to be adapted based on various factors, including a determined user persona of the user, …, promotional offers from a marketing entity, and/or interaction with other digital assistants of other devices. The exemplary embodiments enable utilizing cues taken from the user and/or the environment for adaptation of a digital assistant persona of a digital assistant. In one embodiment, a digital assistant persona can adapt in response to the personas of other users' digital assistants (which may or may not be nearby), as well as more local intelligent digital assistants (e.g., for a house, a banquet hall, retail store, and so forth”, paragraph 10.
“…mood or behavior trait can be in reaction to…”, paragraph 28).
And e) transmit, over the communication network, the second piece of vocalized speech data to the client terminal of the user.
(“ The determination of the user deficiency can be based on the analyzing of the user input. At 310, the first communication device can receive a promotional offer from a marketing system. In one embodiment, the promotional offer can be based on a benefit being provided by the marketing system in exchange for presentation of marketing information by the first digital assistant. The first communication device can provide an acceptance of the promotional offer to the marketing system….”, paragraph 29).
BALDWIN does not specifically disclose the following limitations, but Jung as shown does:
a second piece of vocalized speech data
(“…. For example, user eye movement data may indicate a user interaction with an advertisement at a time when an alertness or attention module 148 measures user heart rate data indicating an increase in alertness or excitedness. In another example, user … device data may indicate a user interaction with a particular segment of a virtual world that is coincident with a certain face pattern test module 160 output and a particular speech or voice test module 156 output. Together, these user-health test function outputs may provide a detailed portrait of a user's response to, for example, an advertisement….”, paragraph 51.
“[0080] Speech can be tested, for example, by measuring voice, song, and/or other vocal utterances of a user (e.g., can a user say the words on a screen, does an advertising slogan come easily to a user's lips, is a jingle catchy such that a user sings it after hearing it, does a user respond out loud to an advertisement, or the like).
[0081] Speech responses to an advertiser-specified attribute 122 such as a jingle, slogan, or design may be gauged from a user's interaction with the advertiser-specified attribute 122. User-application interaction data 132 may demonstrate user interest in the advertiser-specified attribute 122 in the form of speech data (e.g., sounds including words uttered relating to the advertisement), or the like”, paragraph 80 and 81).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Jung’s teaching with the teaching of Baldwin. One would have been motivated to provide functionality to generate a piece or segment of speech or voice responsive to user interaction or reaction to advertisement (see Jung abstract).
As to claims 4-5 and 15-16, BALDWIN discloses
Claims 4 and 15:
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to transmit the first piece of vocalized speech data or the second piece of vocalized speech data based on a probability factor stored in the first storage associated with the piece of advertisement.
(“[0023] In one embodiment, the device 110 can utilize sensing, inference, and/or data capture, to provide information management and interaction control. For example, the amount and/or type of information being shared by the digital assistant 150 can vary depending on the intent and/or purpose of the digital assistant persona 170, as well as other information…”, paragraph 23).
Claims 5 and 16:
wherein the probability factor is associated with a question sentence stored in the first storage in association with the piece of advertisement.
(“… the advertising or marketing information is provided by the digital assistant 150 as a response to a question being posed by the user 130….the device 110 can utilize sensing, inference, and/or data capture, to provide information management and interaction control….”, paragraphs 21 and 23).
As to claims 6 and 17, BALDWIN discloses
wherein the first piece of vocalized speech data or the second piece of vocalized speech data is output by a voice agent.
(“A method that incorporates the subject disclosure may include, for example, providing a first digital assistant to engage in a first communication exchange with a user of the first communication device where the first digital assistant has a first digital assistant persona that controls information provided by the first digital assistant during communication exchanges,…”, see at least abstract and Fig. 1).
As to claim 7, BALDWIN discloses
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: collect user Internet browsing history information of the user or user Internet posting history information of the user, and analyze the collected user Internet browsing history information or the collected user Internet posting history information to obtain the preference of the user.
(“0017] …. The avatars 190, 192 can be of various type including avatars that are depicted to resemble the users or resemble someone according to user preferences…”,paragraph 17.
“…This can include mimicking or otherwise presenting one or more of similar speech patterns, vocabulary, audio pitch, audio volume, and so fort…”, paragraph 19).
As to claim 8, BALDWIN discloses
wherein the content of the piece of advertisement is different from the text information.
(“…marketing system that can provide promotional offers 125 to the mobile device 110 and can receive acceptances from the mobile device 110 of one or more of the promotional offers….”, paragraph 20.
“… the advertising or marketing information can be applied to the digital assistant, such as interweaved into a communication exchange [Examiner interprets as …piece of advertisement is different from the text information], so that the user may not perceive it as advertising. In one embodiment, the advertising or marketing information is provided by the digital assistant 150 as a response to a question being posed by the user 130”, paragraph 21).
As to claim 21, BALDWIN discloses
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to [transmit the second piece of vocalized speech data to the client terminal of the user at a predetermined time] based on the transmission of the first piece of vocalized speech data.
(“ The determination of the user deficiency can be based on the analyzing of the user input. At 310, the first communication device can receive a promotional offer from a marketing system. In one embodiment, the promotional offer can be based on a benefit being provided by the marketing system in exchange for presentation of marketing information by the first digital assistant. The first communication device can provide an acceptance of the promotional offer to the marketing system….”, paragraph 29).
BALDWIN does not specifically disclose the following limitations, but Jung as shown does:
a second piece of vocalized speech data
(“…. For example, user eye movement data may indicate a user interaction with an advertisement at a time when an alertness or attention module 148 measures user heart rate data indicating an increase in alertness or excitedness. In another example, user … device data may indicate a user interaction with a particular segment of a virtual world that is coincident with a certain face pattern test module 160 output and a particular speech or voice test module 156 output. Together, these user-health test function outputs may provide a detailed portrait of a user's response to, for example, an advertisement….”, paragraph 51.
“[0080] Speech can be tested, for example, by measuring voice, song, and/or other vocal utterances of a user (e.g., can a user say the words on a screen, does an advertising slogan come easily to a user's lips, is a jingle catchy such that a user sings it after hearing it, does a user respond out loud to an advertisement, or the like).
[0081] Speech responses to an advertiser-specified attribute 122 such as a jingle, slogan, or design may be gauged from a user's interaction with the advertiser-specified attribute 122. User-application interaction data 132 may demonstrate user interest in the advertiser-specified attribute 122 in the form of speech data (e.g., sounds including words uttered relating to the advertisement), or the like”, paragraph 80 and 81).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Jung’s teaching with the teaching of Baldwin. One would have been motivated to provide functionality to generate a piece or segment of speech or voice responsive to user interaction or reaction to advertisement (see Jung abstract).
transmit the second piece of vocalized speech data to the client terminal of the user at a predetermined time
(“0082] User speech attributes are indicators of a user's mental status. An example of a speech test function may be a measure of a user's fluency or ability to produce spontaneous speech, including phrase length, rate of speech, abundance of spontaneous speech, tonal modulation, or whether paraphasic errors (e.g., inappropriately substituted words or syllables), neologisms (e.g., nonexistent words), or errors in grammar are present. Another example of a speech test function is a program that can measure the number of words spoken by a user …. The number of words per interaction or per unit time could be measured….”, paragraph 82);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Jung’s teaching with the teaching of Baldwin. One would have been motivated to provide functionality to transmit a second piece of vocalized speech data to the client terminal of the user at a predetermined time in order to support reaction time data (Jung paragraph 215).
Claims 9- 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG. Pub. No. 20150134456 ( BALDWIN) in view of US PG. Pub. No. 20120164613 (Jung) and in view of US 8768759 (Ghosh).
As to claim 9, BALDWIN does not disclose, but Ghosh discloses
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to:
a) estimate a social graph of the user according to user information,
(“In some embodiments, the techniques described herein include a social graph of individuals on the Internet, such as shown in FIG. 1…”, 3:49-50),
b) identify one or more other users that are determined to be acquaintances of the user according to the social graph,
(“…the links or edges of the social graph represent different forms of association including, for example, friendship, trust, acquaintance and the edges on the graph are constrained by dimensions representing ad-hoc types including but not limited to subjects, fields of interest, and/or search terms”, 3: 65-67 and 4:1-5),
c) and transmit the first pieces of vocalized speech data to one or more other client terminals of the one or more other users.
(“Advertising based on influence is provided. In some embodiments, advertising based on influence includes determining an influence score (e.g., based on a given dimension) for a subject (e.g., a user), in which the subject is a potential target for an advertisement; and determining targeting of the advertisement based on criteria including the influence score of potential recipients of the advertisement. In some embodiments, the influence score is a directly estimated objective measure of influence (e.g., estimated using a social graph…”, abstract and claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Ghosh’s teaching with the teaching of Baldwin. One would have been motivated to provide functionality to determine a social graph in order to provide advertisement based on influence (see Ghosh abstract).
As to claim 10, BALDWIN does not disclose, but Ghosh discloses
a) estimate a social graph of the user according to user information,
(“the links or edges of the social graph represent different forms of association including, for example, friendship, trust, acquaintance and the edges on the graph are constrained by dimensions representing ad-hoc types including but not limited to subjects, fields of interest, and/or search terms”, 3: 65-67 and 4:1-5),
b) identify one or more other users that are determined to be acquaintances of the user according to the social graph, (3: 65-67 and 4:1-5),
c) and in response to detecting that at least one of the one or more other users expresses interest in the piece of advertisement, transmit a third piece of vocalized speech data indicating a number of users among the one or more other users that expresses interest in the piece of advertisement to the client terminal
(determining an influence score for a first subject based on the first subject's association with and influence over other subjects in a social graph representing individuals on Internet by estimating centrality and betweenness by relating the first subject to all subjects linked to the first subject directly or by paths of up to a given length in the social graph, wherein the first subject is a potential target for an advertisement; and determining targeting of the advertisement based on criteria including the influence score of potential recipients of the advertisement.”, claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Ghosh’s teaching with the teaching of Baldwin. One would have been motivated to provide functionality to determine a social graph in order to provide advertisement based on influence (see Ghosh abstract).
As to claim 11, BALDWIN does not disclose, but Ghosh discloses
a) identify one or more other users as being targeted by the piece of advertisement, (“determining an influence score for a first subject based on the first subject's association with and influence over other subjects in a social graph representing individuals on Internet by estimating centrality and betweenness by relating the first subject to all subjects linked to the first subject directly or by paths of up to a given length in the social graph, wherein the first subject is a potential target for an advertisement; and determining targeting of the advertisement based on criteria including the influence score of potential recipients of the advertisement”, claim 1.
b) transmit the first piece of vocalized speech data to one or more other client terminals of the one or more other users after a total number of the user and the one or more other users reaches a target number.
(“…advertising determinations are based at least in part on influence scores computed in aggregate rather than on individual users. …the influence of such authors can be estimated and the distribution of such influence and topology of the graph (e.g., social graph) of such authors who are also users of that online newspaper can be used as a proxy for the influence of all actual users …, providing for a better refinement and metric for measuring the influence…”, 5:35-48).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Ghosh’s teaching with the teaching of Baldwin. One would have been motivated to provide functionality to determine advertisement based on score or metrics of influence in order to made advertising determinations based on metrics (see Ghosh 5: 35-50).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments on 12/11/2025 have been very carefully considered but are not persuasive.
Rejection of the claims under 35 USC 101, are withdrawn because amendment to the claims. See examiner notes above.
Applicant argues (remarks 11-12)
Addressing now the rejection of Claims 1-8 and 12-20 under 35 U.S.C. §103 as
unpatentable over Baldwin and Jung. Applicant respectfully traverses these rejections.
Claim 1 recites, in part,…
Applicant respectfully submits that the art fails to disclose or suggest all of the
features set forth by Claim 1.
The outstanding Office Action acknowledges, on page 13, that Baldwin fails to
disclose or suggest the feature of generating a second piece of vocalized speech data, as
recited in Claim 1. To cure the deficiencies of Baldwin, the Office relies on Jung.
Turning to Jung, this reference discusses…
In response the Examiner asserts that the combination of references discloses all the limitations in the instant claims. The claims are not novel. The Examiner respectfully notes that applicant has not provided persuasive rebuttal evidence to overcome the prima facie case of obviousness. Further, the elements of this instant Application are old and well known at the time of the invention. The combination set for the rejection produce results that are predictable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
“Building Autonomous Sensitive Artificial Listeners”. IEEE. 2012.
“This paper describes a substantial effort to build a real-time interactive multimodal dialogue system with a focus on emotional and nonverbal interaction capabilities. The work is motivated by the aim to provide technology with competences in perceiving and producing the emotional and nonverbal behaviors required to sustain a conversational dialogue. We present the Sensitive Artificial Listener (SAL) scenario as a setting which seems particularly suited for the study of emotional and nonverbal behavior since it requires only very limited verbal understanding on the part of the machine. This scenario allows us to concentrate on nonverbal capabilities without having to address at the same time the challenges of spoken language understanding, task modeling, etc. We first report on three prototype versions of the SAL scenario in which the behavior of the Sensitive Artificial Listener characters was determined by a human operator. These prototypes served the purpose of verifying the effectiveness of the SAL scenario and allowed us to collect data required for building system components for analyzing and synthesizing the respective behaviors. We then describe the fully autonomous integrated real-time system we created, which combines incremental analysis of user behavior, dialogue management, and synthesis of speaker and listener behavior of a SAL character displayed as a virtual agent. We discuss principles that should underlie the evaluation of SAL-type systems. Since the system is designed for modularity and reuse and since it is publicly available, the SAL system has potential as a joint research tool in the affective computing research community.”
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 extension fee 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 MARIA VICTORIA VANDERHORST whose telephone number is (571)270-3604. The examiner can normally be reached on business hours from Monday through Friday from 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ashraf Waseem can be reached on 571-270-3948. 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 V VANDERHORST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621 3/21/2026