DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claims 1 and 11 recite “identifying …”, “generating … a first set of inferences …”, “retrieving …”, and “generating … a text output”. These limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “processor”. For example, but for the “processor” language, these steps in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually identifying activities in a message, generating a set of inferences from the activities, retrieving segments of text, and generating and output based on the retrieved text segments. All of these steps can be performed in the mind and/or using a pen and paper. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, 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 only recites additional elements - using a processor to perform these steps. The use of a processor is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic computer device performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose 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. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of “large language models” and steps of “receiving …” and “transmitting …” are merely for the purpose of data gathering and/or insignificant extra-solution activity that amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 includes additional steps that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually performing these steps. All of these steps can be performed in the mind and/or using a pen and paper. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas.
Potential Allowable Subject Matter
Shaikh et al. (USPG 2024/0303439, hereinafter Shaikh), considered the closest prior art on record, discloses a system comprising: one or more processors configured by machine-readable instructions to: identify a plurality of electronic activities matched to a record object of a customer relationship management (CRM) system (figure 2, database 140-a and 125-a; also see paragraphs 40-41, “The communications database 140-a may be an example of the communications database 140 as described with reference to FIG. 1, and may include one or more conversation data sets associated with interactions (e.g., voice communications, text communications) between a user and one or more representatives of an organization”); generate, by inputting a first set of text strings of one or more text strings obtained from the plurality of electronic activities into one or more large language models, a first set of inferences (paragraphs 2, elements 210 and 215; paragraph 42, inference engine 210 generates a set or intents 215 or “a first set of inferences”) and, for each inference of the first set of inferences: an attribute indicating a level of relevance of the inference to the record object (paragraph 42, “probability” value); receive a selection of an inference of the first set of inferences from a computing device (paragraphs 42-43, selecting candidates that exceed a certain threshold); and transmit the text output to a computing device for presentation.
Le et al. (USPG 2024/0346251) teach a topic evaluation engine that operates in connection with a messaging service by analyzing individual text-based messages, received during a text-based communication session, to identify various message characteristics of each text-based message, and/or to infer one or more topics to which each message relates. Each message that is determined to have a particular message characteristic is then forwarded to any application that previously subscribed with the messaging service to receive messages having the specific message characteristic. Similarly, each message that is associated with a specific topic is distributed to any application integrated with the messaging service that has previously subscribed with the messaging service to receive messages relating to the specific topic. The integrated applications can then process the message and provide enhanced functionality (referring to the reference).
Both references, individually or in combination, fails to explicitly disclose for each inference of the first set of inferences: one or more references, each corresponding to a text string of a subset of the first set of text strings corresponding to the inference, and an attribute indicating a level of relevance of the inference to the record object; retrieve, using the one or more references corresponding to the selected inference, a subset of text strings of the first set of text strings corresponding to the inference; generate, by inputting the retrieved subset of text strings into the one or more large language models, a text output.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bhupati et al. (USPG 2024/0378396) teach LLM integrations for content analysis that is considered pertinent to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUYEN X VO whose telephone number is (571)272-7631. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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 at 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.
/HUYEN X VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2656
Prosecution Insights