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
This Office action has been issued in response to amendment filed on 04/23/2026
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11 and 13-23 pending and claims 2, 7 and 12 are cancelled. Applicants' arguments have been carefully and respectfully considered and addressed. Accordingly, this action has been made FINAL necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the amended claims were fully considered and are moot in view of the new ground 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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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/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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 3-4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 11 and 20 of U.S. Patent No 9031927. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claims 6, 8-11, 13-15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of copending Application No. 19056136. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Schmidt et al (hereinafter Schmidt) US Publication No 20200117740 in view of Rossi et al (hereinafter Rossi) US Publication No 20250225146.
As per claim 1, Schmidt teaches:
A system for providing ambient analytics information, for use with a data analytics environment, comprising:
A computer device including a computer hardware and a data analytics assistant provided thereon that operates with a data analytics system or environment and provides natural language processing capabilities, for purposes of generating, modifying, or interacting with data visualizations,
(Fig. 1 and Abstract paragraphs [0003], [0010], [0017], [0021], [0024]-[0026])
Said data analytics system including an ambient analytics/visualization processing component that leverages a real-time transcription of an interaction with or between one or more users as part of a conversation,
(Fig. 1 and Abstract paragraphs [0003], [0010], [0017], [0021], [0024]-[0026])
wherein the ambient analytics/visualization processing component operates to:
identify, based on the real-time transcription of the interaction, data related words and concepts provided therein, and associate the data related words and concepts with a natural language query representing a context;
(Abstract and paragraphs [0003], [0013], [0021], [0024]-[0026], [0032]-[0033] and [0047]-[0048])
determine a relevant dataset that addresses the context, for use in generating and returning data analytics or visualization information;
(Abstract and paragraphs [0003], [0013], [0021], [0024]-[0026], [0029], [0032]-[0033] and [0047]-[0048])
and based upon the determination of the relevant dataset, processing the natural language query representing the context, against the relevant dataset, and automatically suggesting insights and data visualizations that are associated with the relevant dataset, for further use within the conversation.
(Fig. 1A, 3 and Abstract and paragraphs [0003], [0026], [0030], [0032] and [0047])
Schmidt does not explicitly large language model or knowledge service, to drive the surfacing of relevant data visualizations or other analytics information, however in analogous art of data management, Rossi teaches:
in combination with a large language model or knowledge service, to drive the surfacing of relevant data visualizations or other analytics information.
(Abstract and paragraphs [0006]-[0007], [0027] and [0035], wherein analytics visualization leverages machine learning model/ large language model (LLM) to provide data visualization based on user interactions)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Schmidt and Rossi by incorporating the teaching of Rossi into the method of Schmidt. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Rossi into the system of Schmidt for the purpose of increasing the strength/capability of analytical engine.
As per claim 3, Schmidt and Rossi teach:
The system of claim 1, wherein the data analytics system or environment includes a data analytics assistant provided by or for use with the data analytics environment in generating data visualizations associated with datasets.
(Fig. 1A, 3 and Abstract and paragraphs [0003], [0026], [0030], [0032] and [0047])(Schmidt)
As per claim 4, Schmidt and Rossi teach:
the data analytics system or environment receives as input a natural language (NL) expression, and the input NL expression is associated with a context;
(Fig. 1 and Abstract paragraphs [0003], [0010], [0017], [0021], [0024]-[0026])( Schmidt)
a search component finds a most relevant dataset, which is returned to a data visualization (DV) environment for rendering within a user interface.
(Fig. 1A, 3 and Abstract and paragraphs [0003], [0026], [0030], [0032] and [0047])( Schmidt)
As per claim 5, Schmidt and Rossi teach:
data analytics system or environment and digital assistant system or environment are provided or communicate as part of a cloud environment.
(Paragraph [0069])( Schmidt)
Claims 6, 8-10 are method claims respectively corresponding to system claims 1, 3-5 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 1 and 3-5.
Claims 11, 13-15 are non-transitory computer readable storage medium claims respectively corresponding to method claims 1, 3-5 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 1 and 3-5.
Claims 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Schmidt and Rossi in view of Zhu et al (hereinafter Zhu) US Publication No 20190205384.
As per claim 16, Schmidt and Rossi do not explicitly teach data related words are identified based on natural language by associating word to semantic types from a knowledge service, however in analogous art of data management, Zhu teaches:
data related words are identified based on natural language by associating word to semantic types from a knowledge service.
(Abstract and paragraphs [0005], [0022], [0024], [0062] and [0070])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person in the ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filling of the invention to combine Schmidt and Rossi and Zhu by incorporating the teaching of Zhu into the method of Zhu. One having ordinary skill in the art would have found it motivated to use the content management of Rossi into the system of Zhu for the purpose of managing content to improve query accuracy
As per claim 17, Schmidt and Rossi and Zhu teach:
The system of claim 16, wherein the type of query generated and chart to create are based on an auto-insights service which uses heuristics to determine useful query and chart types for different comparison or observation concepts.
(Abstract and paragraphs [0005], [0022], [0024], [0062] and [0070])(Zhu)
As per claim 18, Schmidt and Rossi and Zhu teach:
The system of claim 17, wherein the system maintains a self-created, ordered context out of identified data key words to allow interpretation of relative phrases.
(Fig. 1 and Abstract paragraphs [0003], [0010], [0017], [0021], [0024]-[0026]) (Schmidt) (Abstract and paragraphs [0005], [0022], [0024], [0062] and [0070])(Zhu)
Claims 19-21 are method claims respectively corresponding to system claims 16-18 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 16-18
Claims 22-23 are non-transitory computer readable storage medium claims respectively corresponding to method claims 16-17 and they are rejected under the same rational as claims 16-17.
Conclusion
As necessitated by amendment, 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 extension fee 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 Tarek Chbouki whose telephone number is 571-2703154. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached at 571-2701760. 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.
/TAREK CHBOUKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2165 7/22/2026
Prosecution Insights