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 corresponds to application 19/017,086 which was filed on 1/10/2025 and is a CON of 18/054,694 filed 11/11/2022 and is a CON of 16/152,005 filed 10/04/2018.
Response to Amendment
In the reply filed 3/20/2026, claims 1, 7, and 13 have been amended. No additional claims have been added or cancelled. Accordingly, claims 1-18 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 3/20/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
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 1-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,229,194. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the limitations of the instant application are taught by the parent patent 12,229,194.
Application 19/017,086
Patent 12,229,194
1, 7, 13. A method, comprising:
after automatically populating one or more display elements in a data object template with data items from a first dataset to generate a graphical user interface, identifying one or more unpopulated display elements in the data object template that can be populated with one or more additional data items from another dataset in a data repository;
identifying, based on template definitions of relationships between datasets associated with the data object template, a second dataset in the data repository, separate from the first dataset, that is related to the first dataset that includes the one or more additional data items corresponding to the one or more unpopulated display elements, wherein the template definitions of relationships are indicated within the data object template and determined from properties of the datasets associated with the data object template
retrieving the one or more additional data items from the second dataset that is related to the first dataset in the data repository based on the template definitions; and
populating the one or more unpopulated display elements with the one or more additional data items to update the graphical user interface.
1. A method, performed by one or more processors, of interacting with data in a data repository, the method comprising:
accessing a data object template in dependence on a determined data object type of a data object, wherein the data object template comprises:
a plurality of display elements for a graphical user interface, and
definitions identifying one or more joined datasets in a data repository from which data items related to the data object can be retrieved;
automatically populating one or more display elements of the data object template with data items from a first dataset in the data repository to create a data object view graphical user interface;
after automatically populating the one or more display elements with the data items from the first dataset, determining whether the populated data object template includes one or more unpopulated display elements that can be populated with one or more additional data items stored in a joined dataset other than the first dataset; and
in response to determining that the one or more unpopulated display elements of the populated data object template can be populated with the one or more additional data items: identifying, based on the definitions, a second dataset in the data repository that is joined to the first dataset and that includes the one or more additional data items corresponding to the one or more unpopulated display elements;
retrieving the one or more additional data items from the second dataset in the data repository based on the definitions; and
populating the one or more unpopulated display elements of the populated data object template with the retrieved additional data items to update the data object view graphical user interface.
2, 8, 14. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a user input selecting a link displayed via the graphical user interface, wherein the link is associated with one or more data objects;
determining a data object type of the one or more data objects associated with the link; and
repopulating the one or more display elements with data in dependence on the one or more data objects if the data object type of the one or more data objects is compatible with the one or more display elements or the graphical user interface.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a user input selecting a link from one or more selectable links displayed via the graphical user interface, wherein the selectable links are linked to linked data objects;
determining a data object type of a linked data object associated with the selected link;
determining if the data object type of the linked data object associated with the selected link is compatible with the data object view graphical user interface; and in response to a positive determination, repopulating the data object template with data in dependence on the linked data object.
3, 9, 15. The method of claim 2, further comprising: retrieving a data object template in dependence on the data object type of the one or more data objects associated with the link if the data object type is incompatible with the one or more display elements or the graphical user interface, wherein the data object type of the one or more data objects is compatible with the data object template; and
populating the data object template in dependence on the one or more data objects to generate a linked data object view graphical user interface.
3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: in response to a negative determination: retrieving a further data object template in dependence on the data object type of the linked data object, wherein the data object type of the linked data object is compatible with the further data object template;
populating the further data object template in dependence on the linked data object to generate a linked data object view graphical user interface; and
displaying the linked data object view graphical user interface.
4, 10, 16. The method of claim 2, further comprising determining one or more properties of the one or more data objects to determine the data object type.
4. The method of claim 2, wherein determining the data object type comprises: determining one or more properties of the linked data object.
5, 11, 17. The method of claim 4, wherein the one or more properties include a data format, a data use history, a column and/or row title, and/or metadata.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the one or more properties of the linked data object comprises: a data format; a data use history; a column and/or row title; and/or metadata associated with the linked data object.
6, 12, 18. The method of claim 1, further comprising inferring the template definitions identifying the second dataset from properties of the first dataset and the second dataset.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the definitions identifying the one or more joined datasets in the data repository are inferred from properties of the datasets.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7, 12-13, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Apps et al. (US2015/0135043, previously presented in ‘892), hereinafter Apps, in view of Wolff (US2004/0143477, previously presented in ‘892), Monaharan et al. (US10452650, previously presented in ‘892), hereinafter Monaharan, and Jehuda (US2012/0284259).
Regarding Claim 1:
Apps teaches:
A method, comprising: after automatically populating one or more display elements in a data object template with data items from a first dataset to generate a graphical user interface, identifying one or more unpopulated display elements in the data object template that can be populated with one or more additional data items from another dataset in a data repository (Apps, abstract, figures 23-27, [0010, 0088-0091, 0102, 0109], note auto-load and auto-population of an organizational structure; note predefined template may be accessed to determine the type of a particular organization and fill in the chart accordingly; note allowing the users to add additional templates and representing new types of organizations and edit existing templates; note graphical interface of the organization chart with not filled display elements; note preliminary version of the org chart and visual representation of the chart; note creating a data structure for an organizational chart using information extracted from a first data source and the extractor identifying missing information, e.g., additional key executives, and populating that data with data from another dataset);
identifying, based on template definitions of relationships between datasets associated with the data object template, a second dataset in the data repository, separate from the first dataset, that is related to the first dataset that includes the one or more additional data items corresponding to the one or more unpopulated display elements (Apps, abstract, figures 17, 23-27, [0010, 0088-0091, 0102, 0109], note accessing additional data sources if relevant, note the data sources are separate datasets that are related to the template, e.g., sources that are intelligently identified by the system are interpreted as related and based on the template definitions), wherein the template definitions of relationships are determined from properties of the datasets associated with the data object template (Apps, figures 17, 22-25, [0088-0091], note intelligently identifying additional sources and determining the relevant information);
retrieving the one or more additional data items from the second dataset that is related to the first dataset in the data repository based on the template definitions (Apps, abstract, figures 17, 23-27, [0010, 0088-0091, 0102, 0109], note intelligently identifying additional sources; note extracting the data items from the additional datasets); and
populating the one or more unpopulated display elements with the one or more additional data items to update the graphical user interface (Apps, abstract, figures 23-27, [0010, 0088-0091, 0102, 0109], note populating the org chart with the extracted data items, e.g., populating the unpopulated display elements).
While Apps teaches populating display elements based on templates and multiple data sources, to further support this interpretation, Wolff is in the same field of endeavor, data management, and Wolff teaches:
a second dataset in the data repository, separate from the first dataset, that is related to the first dataset (Wolff, figure 3, [0009, 0038-0040, 0134], note joins based on template dataset schema), wherein the template definitions of relationships are determined from properties of the datasets associated with the data object template (Wolff, [0134], note the joins are based on the template database schema, for example joining bills with waterproofing was used);
retrieving the one or more additional data items from the second dataset that is related to the first dataset in the data repository based on the template definitions (Wolff, figures 3-5, 9, [0015, 0067-0068, 0084, 0092, 0134], note updating information); and
populating the one or more unpopulated display elements with the one or more additional data items to update the graphical user interface (Wolff, figures 3-5, 9, [0009, 0092, 0096-0097, 0134], note updating information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Wolff because all references are directed towards data management and because Wolff would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the relevant data available for quick retrieval by using join based results being based on definitions (or schemas).
While Apps as modified teaches populating display elements based on templates and multiple data sources, Apps as modified doesn’t specifically teach template definitions of relationships between datasets associated with the data object template. However, Monaharan is in the same field of endeavor, data management, and Monaharan teaches:
identifying, based on template definitions of relationships between datasets associated with the data object template, a second dataset in the data repository, separate from the first dataset, that is related to the first dataset that includes the one or more additional data items corresponding to the one or more unpopulated display elements, wherein the template definitions of relationships are determined from properties of the datasets associated with the data object template (Monaharan, column 3 line 63 – column 4 line 43, column 4 line 65 – column 5 line 16, column 15 lines 1-5, column 16 lines 10-40; note templates used to populate display elements identify data from various sources, e.g., identifying a second dataset based on template definitions of joins between datasets),;
retrieving the one or more additional data items from the second dataset that is related to the first dataset in the data repository based on the template definitions (Monaharan, column 3 line 63 – column 4 line 43, column 4 line 65 – column 5 line 16, column 15 lines 1-5, column 16 lines 10-40; note templates used to populate display elements identify data from various sources, when combined with the previously cited references this would be for the additional data items as taught by Apps and Wolff); and
populating the one or more unpopulated display elements with the one or more additional data items to update the graphical user interface (Monaharan, column 3 line 63 – column 4 line 43, column 4 line 65 – column 5 line 16, column 15 lines 1-5, column 16 lines 10-40; note templates used to populate display elements identify data from various sources, when combined with the previously cited references this would be for the additional data items as taught by Apps and Wolff).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Monaharan because all references are directed towards data management and because Monaharan would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the usability of the system by simplifying the data extraction with templates (Monaharan, column 2 lines 41-54).
While Apps as modified teaches populating display elements based on templates and multiple data sources, Apps as modified doesn’t specifically teach wherein the template definitions of relationships are indicated within the data object template. However, Jehuda is in the same field of endeavor, data management, and Jehuda teaches:
identifying, based on template definitions of relationships between datasets associated with the data object template, a second dataset in the data repository, separate from the first dataset, that is related to the first dataset that includes the one or more additional data items corresponding to the one or more unpopulated display elements, wherein the template definitions of relationships are indicated within the data object template and determined from properties of the datasets associated with the data object template (Jehuda, figure 3 and 7, [0064-0066, 0114], note the mashup template indicate a plurality of related data sources to update the dashboard. When combined with the previously cited references this would be the additional sources used as taught by Apps).
retrieving the one or more additional data items from the second dataset that is related to the first dataset in the data repository based on the template definitions (Jehuda, figure 3 and 7, [0064-0066, 0114], note the mashup template indicate a plurality of related data sources to update the dashboard. When combined with the previously cited references this would be the additional sources used as taught by Apps)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Jehuda because all references are directed towards data management and because Jehuda would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the accuracy and usability of the system by utilizing templates to extract data from multiple sources (Jehuda, [0004-0006]).
Regarding Claim 6:
Apps as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Apps as modified further teaches:
inferring the template definitions identifying the second dataset from properties of the first dataset and the second dataset (Apps, figures 22-25, [0088-0091], note determining the relevant information, e.g., inferring template definitions)(Wolff, [0134], note the joins are based on the template database schema, for example joining bills with waterproofing was used).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Wolff because all references are directed towards data management and because Wolff would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the relevant data available for quick retrieval by using join based results being based on definitions (or schemas).
Claim 7 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1 respectively, except claim 7 is directed to a system comprising memory and processors (Apps, figure 19, note CPU and memory) while claim 1 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 7 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 1.
Claim 12 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 6 respectively, except claim 12 is directed to a system comprising memory and processors (Apps, figure 19, note CPU and memory) while claim 6 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 6.
Claim 13 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1 respectively, except claim 13 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium while claim 1 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 1.
Claim 18 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 6 respectively, except claim 18 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium while claim 6 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 2-5, 8-11, and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Apps in view of Wolff, Monaharan, Jehuda, and Berger et al. (US2009/0044095, previously presented in ‘892), hereinafter Berger.
Regarding Claim 2:
Apps as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Apps as modified further teaches:
receiving a user input selecting a link displayed via the graphical user interface, wherein the link is associated with one or more data objects (Apps, figures 22-24, [0072, 0086-0091], note identifying a first and additional data sources is interepted as a user input selecting a link; note the user may provide a website address as a data source, e.g., selecting a link) (Wolff, [0080-0084, 0118, 0127, 0237-0241, 0314], note providing feedback form user) (Monaharan, column 3 line 42 – column 4 line 43; note modifying input of a user interface, e.g., selecting a link);
determining a data object type of the one or more data objects associated with the link (Apps, figure 23-27, [0072-0073, 0088-0091], note the user identifying data sources with potential additional information; note the user can specify the type of information required for the org chart; note the extractor may identify relevant information from the data sources, which is interpreted to mean the data type was determined to match to relevant data types, e.g., text fields and type of information used by that org chart) (Wolff, [0080-0084, 0118, 0127-0128, 0237-0241, 0314], note ensuring feedback information is updated to appropriate places, which is interepted to mean data type is determined since the appropriate data type is required for the updated data to updated correctly; note user specifying types of data to be gathered, e.g., determining data object type) (Monaharan, column 3 line 42 – column 4 line 43; note modifying input of a user interface, e.g., selecting a link, and determining changed parameters, e.g., data types); and
repopulating the one or more display elements with data in dependence on the one or more data objects if the data object type of the one or more data objects is compatible with the one or more display elements or the graphical user interface (Apps, figure 23-27, [0072-0073, 0088-0091], note extracting the relevant information from the data sources to populate the display elements) (Wolff, [0080-0084, 0118, 0127-0128, 0237-0241, 0314], note updating with feedback information) ((Monaharan, column 3 line 63 – column 4 line 43, column 4 line 65 – column 5 line 16, column 15 lines 1-5, column 16 lines 10-40; note templates used to populate display elements identify data from various sources).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Wolff because all references are directed towards data management and because Wolff would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the relevant data available for quick retrieval by using join based results being based on definitions (or schemas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Monaharan because all references are directed towards data management and because Monaharan would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the usability of the system by simplifying the data extraction with templates (Monaharan, column 2 lines 41-54).
While Apps as modified teaches receiving user input for additional data objects, to further support the interpretation of Apps as modified determining the object type, Berger is in the same field of endeavor, data management, and Berger teaches:
determining a data object type of the one or more data objects associated with the link (Berger, figure 1B, [0019], note determine object type of object to be incorporated in a template);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Berger because all references are directed towards data management and because Berger would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the useability of the system by enabling objects of various types to be retrieved and incorporated.
Regarding Claim 3:
Apps as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Apps as modified further teaches:
retrieving a data object template in dependence on the data object type of the one or more data objects associated with the link if the data object type is incompatible with the one or more display elements or the graphical user interface, wherein the data object type of the one or more data objects is compatible with the data object template (Wolff, figures 9-10, [0314], note assuring feedback information is delivered to the right activity and template; note dependencies among the activities and templates. This is interepted to mean any data objects that were incompatible would be delivered to compatible templates, e.g., retrieving the compatible data object template, to be populated) (Berger, figure 1B, [0019], note determine object template to use for the determined object type. When combined with the previously cited references this would be for the incompatible data objects for the templates as taught by Apps and Wolff); and
populating the data object template in dependence on the one or more data objects to generate a linked data object view graphical user interface (Wolff, figures 9-10, [0314, 0319], note assuring feedback information is delivered to the right activity and template; note dependencies among the activities and templates. This is interepted to mean any data objects that were incompatible would be delivered to compatible templates, e.g., retrieving the compatible data object template, to be populated) (Berger, figure 1B, [0019-20], note populate the data object template. When combined with the previously cited references this would be for the templates as taught by Apps and Wolff);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Wolff because all references are directed towards data management and because Wolff would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the relevant data available for quick retrieval by using join based results being based on definitions (or schemas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Berger because all references are directed towards data management and because Berger would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the useability of the system by enabling objects of various types to be retrieved and incorporated.
Regarding Claim 4:
Apps as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Apps as modified further teaches:
determining one or more properties of the one or more data objects to determine the data object type (Apps, figures 22-24, [0050-0051, 0072, 0086-0091, 0102, 0109], note determining relevant data objects; note charts with properties and object types) (Wolff, figure 4, [0073, 0080-0085, 0112, 0127, 0237-0241, 0314], note providing feedback form user) (Berger, figure 1B, [0017-0020], note determining object type; determine object metadata. When combined with the previously cited references this would be for the incompatible data objects for the templates as taught by Apps and Wolff).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Wolff because all references are directed towards data management and because Wolff would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the relevant data available for quick retrieval by using join based results being based on definitions (or schemas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Berger because all references are directed towards data management and because Berger would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the useability of the system by enabling objects of various types to be retrieved and incorporated.
Regarding Claim 5:
Apps as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Apps as modified further teaches:
wherein the one or more properties include a data format, a data use history, a column and/or row title, and/or metadata (Apps, [0045, 0050, 0057, 0072, 0075], note metadata and format) (Wolff, figures 4-6, [0061-0064, 0118, 0289], note the use format and activity, title) (Berger, figure 1B, [0017-0020], note determining object type; determine object metadata. When combined with the previously cited references this would be for the incompatible data objects for the templates as taught by Apps and Wolff).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Wolff because all references are directed towards data management and because Wolff would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the relevant data available for quick retrieval by using join based results being based on definitions (or schemas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Berger because all references are directed towards data management and because Berger would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in information retrieval which would improve the useability of the system by enabling objects of various types to be retrieved and incorporated.
Claim 8 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 2 respectively, except claim 8 is directed to a system comprising memory and processors (Apps, figure 19, note CPU and memory) while claim 2 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 8 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 2.
Claim 9 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 3 respectively, except claim 9 is directed to a system comprising memory and processors (Apps, figure 19, note CPU and memory) while claim 3 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 9 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 3.
Claim 10 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 4 respectively, except claim 10 is directed to a system comprising memory and processors (Apps, figure 19, note CPU and memory) while claim 4 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 10 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 4.
Claim 11 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 5 respectively, except claim 11 is directed to a system comprising memory and processors (Apps, figure 19, note CPU and memory) while claim 5 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 5.
Claim 14 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 2 respectively, except claim 14 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium while claim 2 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 2.
Claim 15 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 3 respectively, except claim 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium while claim 3 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 3.
Claim 16 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 4 respectively, except claim 16 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium while claim 4 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 16 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 4.
Claim 17 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 5 respectively, except claim 17 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium while claim 5 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Xiao et al. (US10366079) and Chandrasekaran (US2014/0040257) teach templates indicating data sources to pull data from.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J MORRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-3314. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00-2:00 PM EST.
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, Neveen Abel-Jalil can be reached at 571-270-0474. 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.
/JOHN J MORRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2152 3/26/2026
/NEVEEN ABEL JALIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2152
Prosecution Insights