DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to Applicant’s submission filed on 1/6/2025. This Application is a CON case based on Application 18/238898 which was a CON case based on 17/552887. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application of which Claims 1, and 13 are independent and have been examined.
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 .
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, or 365 is acknowledged. The prior-filed application (Provisional application No. 62/668151 Filed on 5/7/2018) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s)(IDS) submitted on 1/6/2025, 8/18/2025 and 2/19/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Listed claims are objected to for the informalities shown and may be addressed with suggested amendments:
Claims 1 and 13, line 26, and 33 respectively, recite: … automatically resume the first session, the multiple alternative states including …”. It is recommended to change it to … automatically resume the first dialog session, the multiple alternative states including …”.
Applicant is advised to review all claims for any potential claim objection issues.
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.
Note: Mapping below is demonstrating a nonstatutory double patenting of the instant application against issued patent of US12243526, however, issued patents of US11830491 and US11217247 have similar claims as the instant application, as such a timely filed terminal disclaimer for all three issued patents will be required to overcome the nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1-5, 7, 10, and 11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 - 5, 9, 8 and 7, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12243526 in view of McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are obvious variants of one another. The instant application differs in limitations of “selecting a particular alternative state, from among multiple alternative states in which the client device does not automatically resume the first session, the multiple alternative states including: a first alternative state where the first dialog session is not resumed automatically, but is suggested for resumption via user interface output, and a second alternative state where the first dialog session is not automatically resumed nor suggested for resumption;”. However, McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1) does disclose the mentioned limitations in Par. 0049, 0055. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skilled in the art to have modified the issued patent with the teaching of McConnell to resume or not the previous dialog with predictable results.
Furthermore, claims 13-17, 18, 19 and 20 are mirrored claims to 1-5, 6, 7 and 8, respectively. As such they are being rejected for the same reasons.
Instant application: 19025587
Issued patent: US12243526
1
A method implemented using one or more processors, the method comprising:
1
A method implemented using one or more processors, the method comprising:
1.aa
receiving, over multiple dialog turns of a first dialog session that is between a user and an automated assistant, spoken utterance data indicative of multiple spoken utterances of a user detected via one or more microphones of a client device;
1.a
receiving, over multiple dialog turns of a first dialog session that is between a user and an automated assistant, spoken utterance data indicative of multiple spoken utterances of a user detected via one or more microphones of a client device;
1.bb
identifying, based on the spoken utterance data, multiple instances of first content that are each responsive to a corresponding one of the multiple spoken utterances of the user;
1.b
identifying, based on the spoken utterance data, multiple instances of first content that are each responsive to a corresponding one of the multiple spoken utterances of the user;
1.cc
causing the client device to render the first content during the first dialog session;
1.c
causing the client device to render the first content during the first dialog session;
1.dd
receiving interruption data during rendering of at least part of the first content by the client device during the first dialog session, the interruption data received in response to further user interface input of the user that is detected during rendering of the at least part of the first content during the first dialog session;
1.d
receiving interruption data during rendering of at least part of the first content by the client device during the first dialog session, the interruption data received in response to further user interface input of the user that is detected during rendering of the at least part of the first content during the first dialog session;
1.ee
in response to receiving the interruption data:
1.e
in response to receiving the interruption data:
1.f
storing session data, for the first dialog session, in local memory of the client device or in remote memory of a remote server in network communication with the client device, wherein the session data indicates a state of the first dialog session when the interruption data was received;
1.gg
causing the client device to render alternative content during a second dialog session that at least temporarily replaces the first dialog session,
1.g
causing the client device to render alternative content during a second dialog session that at least temporarily replaces the first dialog session,
1.hh
wherein the alternative content is different from the first content, and
1.h
wherein the alternative content is different from the first content, and
1.ii
wherein causing the client device to render the alternative content during the second dialog session comprises causing the client device to render the alternative content in lieu of the first content;
1.i
wherein causing the client device to render the alternative content during the second dialog session comprises causing the client device to render the alternative content in lieu of the first content;
1.jj
determining whether to cause the client device to automatically resume the first dialog session;
1.j
determining whether to cause the client device to automatically resume the first dialog session;
1.kk
in response to determining to not cause the client device to automatically resume the first dialog session:
1.k
in response to determining to cause the client device to automatically resume the first dialog session:
1.l
retrieving the stored session data for the first dialog session, and automatically resuming the first dialog session in the state indicated by the session data; and
1.mm
selecting a particular alternative state, from among multiple alternative states in which the client device does not automatically resume the first session,
Obvious over McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1, Par. 0055)
1.n
in response to determining to not cause the client device to resume the first dialog session:
1.oo
the multiple alternative states including: a first alternative state where the first dialog session is not resumed automatically, but is suggested for resumption via user interface output, and a second alternative state where the first dialog session is not automatically resumed nor suggested for resumption; and
Obvious over McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1, Par. 0049)
1.pp
causing the client device to transition to the selected particular alternative state.
1.p
causing the client device to transition to an alternative state in which the client device does not automatically resume the first session.
2
The method of claim 1,
2
The method of claim 1,
wherein determining whether to cause the client device to resume the first dialog session is based on one or more properties of the first dialog session.
wherein determining whether to cause the client device to resume the first dialog session is based on one or more properties of the first dialog session.
3
The method of claim 2,
3
The method of claim 2,
wherein the one or more properties of the first dialog session comprise a classification assigned to the first content.
wherein the one or more properties of the first dialog session comprise a classification assigned to the first content.
4
The method of claim 3,
4
The method of claim 3,
wherein the classification assigned to the first content indicates whether the first content is transient or enduring.
wherein the classification assigned to the first content indicates whether the first content is transient or enduring.
5
The method of claim 1,
5
The method of claim 1,
wherein determining whether to cause the client device to resume the first dialog session is based on one or more properties of the first dialog session and is further based on one or more properties of the second dialog session.
wherein determining whether to cause the client device to resume the first dialog session is based on one or more properties of the first dialog session and is further based on one or more properties of the second dialog session.
6
The method of claim 1,
wherein the selected particular alternative state is the first alternative state.
Obvious over McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1, Par. 0049 & 0055)
7
The method of claim 6,
9
The method of claim 7, wherein
wherein the user interface output, via which the first dialog session is suggested for resumption is a selectable graphical interface element.
the display of the home screen or the ambient screen includes a selectable graphical interface element that can be selected to resume the first dialog session.
8
The method of claim 7, further comprising:
storing session data for the first dialog session; and
Obvious over McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1, Par. 0049)
in response to selection of the selectable graphical element: using the stored session data to resume the first dialog session.
Obvious over McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1, Par. 0055)
9
The method of claim 1,
wherein the selected particular alternative state is the second alternative state.
Obvious over McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1, Par. 0049 & 0055)
10
The method of claim 9, wherein the second alternative state comprises
8
The method of claim 7, wherein
display of a home screen or an ambient screen that lacks any reference to the first dialog session.
the display of the home screen or the ambient screen lacks any reference to the first dialog session.
11
The method of claim 1, wherein the second alternative state comprises
7
The method of claim 1, wherein the alternative state in which the client device does not automatically resume the first dialog session comprises
display of a home screen or an ambient screen.
display of a home screen or an ambient screen.
12
The method of claim 1,
wherein the multiple alternative states further include a third alternative state where the first dialog session is not resumed automatically and is expired completely.
Obvious over McConnell et al. (US 20180358006 A1, Par. 0049 & 0055)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Shen et al. (US20090125813A1) teaches in Par. 0039:” A plan session can be interrupted by the user at any time. The interruptions from the user are also wrapped as user-initiated actions and distributed to the corresponding plan session by the action distributor 106. For example, the user can query the number of steps left in a purchase transaction and/or ask the system to repeat some information. Two types of interruptions are supported, terminated interruption and non-terminated interruption. When a plan session gets a terminated interruption, it responses to the interruption and terminates the session. When a plan session gets a non-terminated interruption, after is responses to the interruption, it continues the session.”
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers and/or paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIOUSH AGAHI whose telephone number is (408)918-7689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bhavesh Mehta can be reached on 571-272-7453. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
DARIOUSH AGAHI, P.E.
Primary Examiner
/DARIOUSH AGAHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2656
Prosecution Insights