Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to communications filed 1/17/2025 As per the claims filed 12/09/2024:
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are currently pending.
Claim(s) 1, 10, 17 is/are independent claims.
Prior Art
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.
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 1-6, 8-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No 11709994. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patent claims anticipate all limitations of the pending claims as shown below.
Claim 1:
The Patent discloses a method comprising: receiving, via a user interface of a client device, a request to populate one or more cells of a plurality of cells of a document having a tabular structure, wherein the one or more cells correspond to at least one attribute pertaining to at least one column header and a first object pertaining to a first row header [claim 1, col 17, lines 40-46];
obtaining contextual information for the request based on the request and content of one or more additional cells corresponding to one or more additional objects pertaining to additional row headers of the document [claim 1, col 17, lines 57-60];
causing an execution of a query, which is based at least in part on the contextual information for the request, to obtain a response from one or more data sources[claim 1, col 17, lines 50-53]; and
causing the user interface to be modified to populate the one or more cells based on the response from the one or more data sources[claim 1, col 17, lines 54-56];.
Claim 2:
The Patent discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the request comprises a first selection and a second selection, wherein the first selection indicates the one or more cells to be populated, and wherein the second selection indicates at least a portion of the contextual information [claim 2, col 18, lines 1-5].
Claim 3:
The Patent discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the one or more data sources comprise at least one of a web search engine, a website, or an external database [claim 3, col 18, lines 6-8].
Claim 4:
The Patent discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first object is the same as a second object, and wherein the first object and the second object each pertain to the first row header [claim 4, col 18, lines 9-11].
Claim 5:
The Patent discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first object is different from a second object, and wherein the first object and the second object each pertain to a different row [claim 5, col 18, lines 12-15].
Claim 6:
The Patent discloses the method of claim 1, wherein causing the execution of the query comprises generating the query based at least in part on the contextual information for the query [claim 6, col 18, lines 6-8].
Claim 8:
The Patent discloses the method of claim 1, wherein receiving the request comprises detecting a cursor highlighting the one or more cells of the plurality of cells [claim 8, col 18, lines 24-26].
Claim 9:
The Patent discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the user interface of the device associated with the user comprises an area presenting the plurality of cells of the document arranged in intersecting rows and columns [claim 9, col 18, lines 27-31].
As per claims 10, 17 they are rejected under the similar reasons as claim 1 above. Additionally, see patent claims 10, 19.
Claims 11-16 18-20 are rejected under the same reasons as claims 2-3, 6-9 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carlos A. Otero et al. (US PG Pub No. 2014/0372857; Published: 12/18/2014)(hereinafter: Otero).
Otero was cited in the IDS filed 1/17/2025.
Claim 1:
As per independent claim 21, Otero discloses a method comprising: receiving, via a user interface of a client device, a request to populate one or more cells of a plurality of cells of a document having a tabular structure, [[0027] user input to populate one or more cells of a spreadsheet, see figures 2A-E] wherein the one or more cells correspond to at least one attribute pertaining to at least one column header and a first object pertaining to a first row header; [[0026-0027] selected cells correspond to a first row and column, see fig 2b, cells associated with a first column header and row header].
obtaining contextual information for the request based on the request and content of one or more additional cells corresponding to one or more additional objects pertaining to additional row headers of the document; [[0025-0027] set of data selected (cell information) used as contextual information for suggestions [0032] cell information (indicating the first attribute and object) is used as contextual information] see fig 2D contextual information based on content of cells B2-B11 and C2-C3.
causing an execution of a query, which is based at least in part on the contextual information for the request, to obtain a response from one or more data sources; [[0027-0029] search query executed against external data sources to obtain suggestions] and
causing the user interface to be modified to populate the one or more cells based on the response from the one or more data sources. [[0028] According to one embodiment, an autosuggestion may be prepopulated into a spreadsheet, and may be displayed in such a way as to be distinguishable from data in the spreadsheet. For example, an autosuggestion may be displayed as "ghosted" or semi-transparent. Other alternatives may include a hovering of an autosuggestion next to a cell, a fill scratchpad displayed in a task pane, a status bar, etc].
Claim 2:
As per claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses wherein the request comprises a first selection and a second selection, wherein the first selection indicates the one or more cells to be populated, and wherein the second selection indicates at least a portion of the contextual information. [[0027] user first selects a set of existing cells that have data, this selection indicates contextual information. [0027-0028] user selects one or more cells to be populated with the suggested results].
Claim 3:
As per claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses wherein the one or more data sources comprise at least one of a web search engine, a website, or an external database [[0028] data searched in external data sources].
Claim 4:
As per claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses wherein the first object is the same as a second object, and wherein the first object and the second object each pertain to the first row header [figs 2C-2D, selection can include the original object, which is used as contextual data, both on the same row].
Claim 5:
As per claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses wherein the first object is different from a second object, and wherein the first object and the second object each pertain to a different row [see figure 2b objects pertaining to different rows].
Claim 6:
As per claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses herein causing the execution of the query comprises generating the query based at least in part on the contextual information for the query [[0027-0029] search query executed against external data sources to obtain suggestions [0028] if a series pattern is detected, an autosuggestion 215 of an extension to the detected series pattern may be displayed. As illustrated, suggested fill results (i.e., an autosuggestion 215) may be provided].
Claim 7:
As per claim 7, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses wherein the content of the one or more additional cells further corresponds to one or more additional attributes pertaining to additional column headers of the document [figs 2C-2D, different attributes corresponding to different columns]. Columns implicitly have headers.
Claim 8:
As per claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses wherein receiving the request comprises detecting a cursor highlighting the one or more cells of the plurality of cells [[0027-0028], figure 2A shows cursor highlighting a plurality of cells, see also 3A-3B].
Claim 9:
As per claim 9, which depends on claim 1, Otero discloses wherein the user interface of the device associated with the user comprises an area presenting the plurality of cells of the document arranged in intersecting rows and columns [0027-0029, see figures 2a-4b UI shows a plurality of cells arranged in intersecting rows and columns].
Claim 10:
As per independent claim 10, it recites a memory device; and a processing device coupled to the memory device, the processing device to perform operations comprising the steps of the method of claim 1, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Claim 11:
As per claim 11, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2 above.
Claim 12:
As per claim 12, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3 above.
Claim 13:
As per claim 13, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 6 above.
Claim 14:
As per claim 14, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 7 above.
Claim 15:
As per claim 15, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 8 above.
Claim 16:
As per claim 16, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 9 above.
Claim 17:
As per independent claim 17, it recites a non-transitory computer-readable storage device including program instructions executable by one or more processors that, when executed, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising the steps of the method of claim 1, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Claim 18:
As per claim 18, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 2 above.
Claim 19:
As per claim 19, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3 above.
Claim 20:
As per claim 20, it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 6 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOWARD CORTES whose telephone number is (571)270-1383. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott T Baderman can be reached on (571)272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HOWARD CORTES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights