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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s response filed 21 April 2026 has been considered and entered. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are pending in this application. An extra erroneous second claim 10 has been cancelled; claims 7 and 16 are currently amended; claims 1-6, 8-15, and 17-20 are original.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 April 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 14, 15, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho et al. (US 2016/0086110 A1), hereinafter Ho, in view of Shadmon et al. (cited in IDS filed 07/16/2025)(US 2002/0120598 A1), hereinafter Shadmon, and further in view of Prilepov et al. (US 2014/0281943 A1), hereinafter Prilepov.
As to claim 1, Ho discloses a method for efficiently encoding a trie data structure for transmission, the method comprising:
receiving, by a computing system, an application programming interface (API) request pertaining to the trie data structure ([0032], Lines 1-6, [0041], [0061], Lines 11-14; A user initiates a request to select desired stored prefix trees, i.e. trie data structures, via a user interface. The desired trees must be provided to enable selection. The user interface thus being a program interacting with a storage program via software “input/output interfaces” analogous to the claimed API request.), wherein the trie data structure is indicative of flows of customer interactions with automated agents of a contact center (Figs. 3-4; [0038], [0055], The prefix trees represent workflows corresponding to customer interactions with agents, either agents as people or self-service website, i.e. an automated agent.);
obtaining, by the computing system, the trie data structure in which each node of multiple nodes of the trie data structure has an associated prefix key that defines a path from a root to the corresponding node (Fig. 4; [0055], [0061], Selected prefix trees are obtained as in Fig. 4.);
transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure (Fig. 4; [0041], [0061], Selected prefix trees are obtained and transmitted to the user interfaces in Fig. 4 to enable user selection for analysis.) .
Ho does not disclose encoding, by the computing system, the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format having a dictionary data structure, in which an identifier of each node is defined as a key of the corresponding node and a parent node identifier for each node is defined as a value of the corresponding node, wherein the nodes in the transmission format do not have the prefix key that defines the path from the root to the corresponding node; and
transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format.
However, Shadmon discloses encoding, by the computing system, the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format having a dictionary data structure, in which an identifier of each node is defined as a key of the corresponding node and a parent node identifier for each node is defined as a value of the corresponding node, wherein the nodes in the transmission format do not have the prefix key that defines the path from the root to the corresponding node (Figs. 2-4, 6, 8; [0161], [0183], [0203]-[0206]; A tree data structure (e.g. Fig. 2) is encoded using a dictionary (Fig. 4) into a trie data structure (e.g. Fig. 3) forming a prefix path of the node values from a root to a leaf node (e.g. as in the Path Strings in Fig. 6). This trie structure is encoded into an analogous ‘transmission format’ (E.g. Fig. 8) where the nodes do not have the prefix from the root to the corresponding node, but rather the parent value and the identifier for the given node. E.g. #88 includes only the parent node value ‘F’ with the value ‘ABC Corp.’ for the given node.).
Shadmon does not specifically disclose transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format.
However, Prilepov discloses receiving, by a computing system, an application programming interface (API) request pertaining to the trie data structure (Fig. 14; [0086] A request for a prefix tree, i.e. a trie data structure, is made via a user application, i.e. using a required API to communicate requests and information to/from the client application and server application.);
encoding, by the computing system, the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format, and transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format (Fig. 14; [0067]-[0068], Lines 1-4; [0087], The prefix tree is encoded to reduce transmission criteria and sent from the server to the client application in response to the request.).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ho with the teachings of Shadmon and Prilepov by modifying Ho such that the requests for prefix trees of Ho result in the returned prefix trees being encoded for transmission back to the user’s application of Ho by encoding the prefix trees of Ho using Patricia trie with a dictionary format with reduced path prefixes like is done with the node prefixes in Shadmon. Said artisan would have been motivated to do so in order to compress the trie data structures of Ho (Shadmon, [0196], [0204]) so as to reduce the network transfer size, the memory footprint, and the workload on the client requesting and receiving the trie data structures (Prilepov, [0067]).
As to claim 10, Ho discloses a system for efficiently encoding a trie data structure for transmission, the system comprising:
at least one processor (Fig. 1; [0034]); and
at least one memory comprising a plurality of instructions stored thereon that, in response to execution by the at least one processor, causes the system to (Fig. 1; [0034]):
receive an application programming interface (API) request pertaining to the trie data structure ([0032], Lines 1-6, [0041], [0061], Lines 11-14; A user initiates a request to select desired stored prefix trees, i.e. trie data structures, via a user interface. The desired trees must be provided to enable selection. The user interface thus being a program interacting with a storage program via software “input/output interfaces” analogous to the claimed API request.), wherein the trie data structure is indicative of flows of customer interactions with automated agents of a contact center (Figs. 3-4; [0038], [0055], The prefix trees represent workflows corresponding to customer interactions with agents, either agents as people or self-service website, i.e. an automated agent.);
obtain the trie data structure in which each node of multiple nodes of the trie data structure has an associated prefix key that defines a path from a root to the corresponding node (Fig. 4; [0055], [0061], Selected prefix trees are obtained as in Fig. 4.);
and
transmit a response to the API request based on the trie data structure (Fig. 4; [0041], [0061], Selected prefix trees are obtained and transmitted to the user interfaces in Fig. 4 to enable user selection for analysis.) .
Ho does not disclose encode the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format having a dictionary data structure, in which an identifier of each node is defined as a key of the corresponding node and a parent node identifier for each node is defined as a value of the corresponding node, wherein the nodes in the transmission format do not have the prefix key that defines the path from the root to the corresponding node; and
transmit a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format.
However, Shadmon discloses encoding, by the computing system, the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format having a dictionary data structure, in which an identifier of each node is defined as a key of the corresponding node and a parent node identifier for each node is defined as a value of the corresponding node, wherein the nodes in the transmission format do not have the prefix key that defines the path from the root to the corresponding node (Figs. 2-4, 6, 8; [0161], [0183], [0203]-[0206]; A tree data structure (e.g. Fig. 2) is encoded using a dictionary (Fig. 4) into a trie data structure (e.g. Fig. 3) forming a prefix path of the node values from a root to a leaf node (e.g. as in the Path Strings in Fig. 6). This trie structure is encoded into an analogous ‘transmission format’ (E.g. Fig. 8) where the nodes do not have the prefix from the root to the corresponding node, but rather the parent value and the identifier for the given node. E.g. #88 includes only the parent node value ‘F’ with the value ‘ABC Corp.’ for the given node.).
Shadmon does not specifically disclose transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format.
However, Prilepov discloses receiving, by a computing system, an application programming interface (API) request pertaining to the trie data structure (Fig. 14; [0086] A request for a prefix tree, i.e. a trie data structure, is made via a user application, i.e. using a required API to communicate requests and information to/from the client application and server application.);
encoding, by the computing system, the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format, and transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format (Fig. 14; [0067]-[0068], Lines 1-4; [0087], The prefix tree is encoded to reduce transmission criteria and sent from the server to the client application in response to the request.).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ho with the teachings of Shadmon and Prilepov by modifying Ho such that the requests for prefix trees of Ho result in the returned prefix trees being encoded for transmission back to the user’s application of Ho by encoding the prefix trees of Ho using Patricia trie with a dictionary format with reduced path prefixes like is done with the node prefixes in Shadmon. Said artisan would have been motivated to do so in order to compress the trie data structures of Ho (Shadmon, [0196], [0204]) so as to reduce the network transfer size, the memory footprint, and the workload on the client requesting and receiving the trie data structures (Prilepov, [0067]).
As to claim 19, Ho discloses one or more non-transitory machine-readable storage media comprising a plurality of instructions stored thereon that, in response to execution by a computing system, causes the computing system to (Fig. 1; [0034]):
receive an application programming interface (API) request pertaining to the trie data structure ([0032], Lines 1-6, [0041], [0061], Lines 11-14; A user initiates a request to select desired stored prefix trees, i.e. trie data structures, via a user interface. The desired trees must be provided to enable selection. The user interface thus being a program interacting with a storage program via software “input/output interfaces” analogous to the claimed API request.), wherein the trie data structure is indicative of flows of customer interactions with automated agents of a contact center (Figs. 3-4; [0038], [0055], The prefix trees represent workflows corresponding to customer interactions with agents, either agents as people or self-service website, i.e. an automated agent.);
obtain the trie data structure in which each node of multiple nodes of the trie data structure has an associated prefix key that defines a path from a root to the corresponding node (Fig. 4; [0055], [0061], Selected prefix trees are obtained as in Fig. 4.);
and
transmit a response to the API request based on the trie data structure (Fig. 4; [0041], [0061], Selected prefix trees are obtained and transmitted to the user interfaces in Fig. 4 to enable user selection for analysis.) .
Ho does not disclose encode the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format having a dictionary data structure, in which an identifier of each node is defined as a key of the corresponding node and a parent node identifier for each node is defined as a value of the corresponding node, wherein the nodes in the transmission format do not have the prefix key that defines the path from the root to the corresponding node; and
transmit a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format.
However, Shadmon discloses encoding, by the computing system, the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format having a dictionary data structure, in which an identifier of each node is defined as a key of the corresponding node and a parent node identifier for each node is defined as a value of the corresponding node, wherein the nodes in the transmission format do not have the prefix key that defines the path from the root to the corresponding node (Figs. 2-4, 6, 8; [0161], [0183], [0203]-[0206]; A tree data structure (e.g. Fig. 2) is encoded using a dictionary (Fig. 4) into a trie data structure (e.g. Fig. 3) forming a prefix path of the node values from a root to a leaf node (e.g. as in the Path Strings in Fig. 6). This trie structure is encoded into an analogous ‘transmission format’ (E.g. Fig. 8) where the nodes do not have the prefix from the root to the corresponding node, but rather the parent value and the identifier for the given node. E.g. #88 includes only the parent node value ‘F’ with the value ‘ABC Corp.’ for the given node.).
Shadmon does not specifically disclose transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format.
However, Prilepov discloses receiving, by a computing system, an application programming interface (API) request pertaining to the trie data structure (Fig. 14; [0086] A request for a prefix tree, i.e. a trie data structure, is made via a user application, i.e. using a required API to communicate requests and information to/from the client application and server application.);
encoding, by the computing system, the nodes of the trie data structure in a transmission format, and transmitting, by the computing system, a response to the API request based on the trie data structure encoded in the transmission format (Fig. 14; [0067]-[0068], Lines 1-4; [0087], The prefix tree is encoded to reduce transmission criteria and sent from the server to the client application in response to the request.).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ho with the teachings of Shadmon and Prilepov by modifying Ho such that the requests for prefix trees of Ho result in the returned prefix trees being encoded for transmission back to the user’s application of Ho by encoding the prefix trees of Ho using Patricia trie with a dictionary format with reduced path prefixes like is done with the node prefixes in Shadmon. Said artisan would have been motivated to do so in order to compress the trie data structures of Ho (Shadmon, [0196], [0204]) so as to reduce the network transfer size, the memory footprint, and the workload on the client requesting and receiving the trie data structures (Prilepov, [0067]).
As to claims 2, 11, and 20, the claims are rejected for the same reasons as claims 1, 10, and 19 above. In addition, Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon and Prilepov, discloses wherein encoding the nodes of the trie data structure in the transmission format comprises:
stripping away an identifier of each node from the prefix key of the corresponding node (Shadmon, Figs. 3, 6, and 8; [0204], [0206], The trie is encoded by compressing as a Patricia trie such that the identifier from the ancestor are stripped away, and the parent node identifier is set in the prefix key. E.g. F as the parent in F ABC Corp for the prefix key of node 88.); and
setting the parent node identifier for the corresponding node as a node identifier immediately preceding the identifier of the corresponding node in the prefix key (Shadmon, Figs. 3, 6, and 8; [0204], [0206], The trie is encoded by compressing as a Patricia trie such that the identifier from the ancestor are stripped away, and the parent node identifier is set in the prefix key. E.g. F as the parent in F ABC Corp for the prefix key of node 88.).
As to claims 5 and 14, the claims are rejected for the same reasons as claims 1 and 10 above. In addition, Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon and Prilepov, discloses wherein transmitting the response to the API request comprises transmitting flow count data only for leaf nodes represented in the trie data structure (Ho, [0044], “counts, from a collection of execution logs, the number of sessions ever reaching the particular node J”).
As to claims 6 and 15, the claims are rejected for the same reasons as claims 1 and 10 above. In addition, Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon and Prilepov, discloses receiving, by the computing system, the response to the API request pertaining to the trie data structure (Prilepov, Fig. 14; [0068]; [0087], The compressed/encoded prefix tree is received.);
reconstructing, by the computing system, the prefix keys for nodes of the trie data structure based on parent node identifier data associated with each node (Prilepov, [0068], [0088], The compressed/encoded prefix tree is decoded to rebuild the prefix tree.);
storing, by the computing system, the trie data structure in a storage format based on the reconstructed prefix keys for the nodes (Prilepov, Fig. 10; [0068], The trie is stored on the client.).
Claims 3, 4, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho, Shadmon, and Prilepov as applied above, and further in view of Cobb et al. (previously presented)(US 2011/0043626 A1), hereinafter Cobb.
As to claims 3 and 12, the claims are rejected for the same reasons as claims 1 and 10 above. In addition, Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon and Prilepov, discloses does not explicitly disclose transmitting the response to the API request comprises excluding, from the response, redundant data pertaining to flows for each node.
However, Cobb discloses transmitting the response to the API request comprises excluding, from the response, redundant data pertaining to flows for each node (Fig. 5D, [0053] [0066], Nodes along a flow which contain the same data, i.e. are redundant, have the redundant data removed.).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon and Prilepov, with the teachings of Cobb by further modifying Ho such that nodes in an interaction flow of Ho which are repetitive, can have redundant elements removed like in Cobb. Said artisan would have been motivated to do so in order to further compress the trie structure in order to further reduce transmission requirements of Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon and Prilepov (Prilepov, [0072]).
As to claims 4 and 13, the claims are rejected for the same reasons as claims 3 and 12 above. In addition, Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon, Prilepov, and Cobb, discloses wherein excluding redundant data comprises excluding, from the response, redundant identifier data values for each flow associated with each node (Cobb, Fig. 5D, [0053] [0066], E.g. the symbols.).
Ho, as previously modified with Shadmon, Prilepov, and Cobb, does not explicitly disclose wherein excluding redundant data comprises excluding, from the response, redundant version, and type data values for each flow associated with each node.
However, Cobb discloses excluding redundant data corresponding to flows in a trie. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to recognize that any redundant data stored in the nodes in the flows of Ho could be excluded if present. As such, specifying any specific type of data, e.g. redundant identifier, version, and type data values, and any other redundant data values would obviously be excluded when detected. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to said artisan to further modify Ho to more explicitly also exclude redundant version, and type data values for each flow associated with each node like is done with identifiers. Said artisan would have been motivated to do so in order to better ensure all redundant data is removed to maintain an efficiently compressed trie (version, and type data values for each flow associated with each node (Prilepov, [0072]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 and 16-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 21 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive. For Examiner’s response, see discussion below:
(a) Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, with respect to the rejections of 7-9 and 16-18 under 35 USC §112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of 7-9 and 16-18 under 35 USC §112(b) have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments to the claims.
(b) At pages 11-12, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103, Applicant argues that Shadmon fails to disclose the features for which it relied upon. Applicant argues that the claim requires encoding nodes of a trie data structure in a transmission format having a dictionary data structure. [Emphasis Applicant’s]. In contrast, Applicant argues, that Shadmon teaches encoding a trie data structure into another type of trie data structure (i.e. a PATRICIA data structure).
As to (b), Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the structure must be a “dictionary data structure”, however Applicant fails to articulate how the Patricia structure of Shadmon is structurally different than the non-defined claimed “dictionary data structure” other than generically stating that the trie data structure of Shadmon is not it. Given Applicant’s lack of any factual evidence of structural differences required by the claimed language, Applicant’s arguments are moot.
(c) At page 12, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103, Applicant argues that claim 1 requires that for a given node in the dictionary data structure, it is the parent node identifier, rather than the parent node value, that defines the value for that given node. Whereas, Applicant alleges, Shadmon #88 includes only the parent node value F with the value ABC Corp.
As to (c), Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. The limitation describes attributes for two different nodes. 1) each node is defined as a key of the corresponding node, and 2) a parent node identifier for each node is defined as a value of the corresponding node. In the example of Fig. 8, for the corresponding node #88, it includes a key of the corresponding node, e.g. the value ‘ABC Corp.’ as well as a value ‘F’. A parent of the corresponding node, e.g. #87, is defined as a value of the corresponding node via a value relating to ‘F’.
(d) At pages 12-14, with respect to claims 2-20, Applicant argues that the claims are allowable at least for the same reasons previously argued with respect to claim 1.
As to (d), Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive for at least the reasons set forth in (b)-(c) above with respect to claim 1, and also for the respective reasons set forth in the respective rejections of those claims above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Amittai et al. (US 2020/0211030 A1) discloses generating a directed graph based on directed paths of historical conversations.
Bumbulis (US 2003/0204513 A1) discloses creating an index based on a path-compressed binary trie.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 JAMES E RICHARDSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1917. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30.
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, Sherief Badawi can be reached at (571) 272-9782. 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.
/James E Richardson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169
Prosecution Insights