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 is responsive to a Request for Continued Examination filed on 12/11/2025. Claims 1,11, 13, 15 and 20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 1 is drawn to method, claim 15 is/are drawn to a system (i.e., a machine/manufacture), and claim 20 drawn to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium.
Step 2A, Prong One: The claims are directed to facilitating interactions between a user and an agent through a multimedia interface. The claims steps include: determining an object to be called based on the multimedia content according to semantic information of the multimedia content, wherein the semantic information of the multimedia content is obtained by processing the multimedia content using a machine learning model, and the object to be called is an agent or a sub-application; displaying, in response to the object to be called being the agent, a message sent from the agent through a message control in the playing interface, wherein the message is generated according to the semantic information of the multimedia content; and displaying a conversation interface between the user and the agent in response to a trigger operation of the user on the message control, wherein the conversation interface comprises an input control for obtaining relevant information about the multimedia content from the agent, the playing interface further comprises an input control for sending a message from the user, and the multimedia content is content in a recommendation stream of multimedia content.
These steps describe activities that are abstract in nature and fall into the t least one categories of Mental Processes (determining user intent or multimedia understanding), presentation of information (displaying messages or conversation interfaces), Certain methods of or organizing human activity (managing user engagement through recommendation system or dialog flows). These claims do not recite any specific improvement to the functioning of a computer or other technology and instead recite an abstract idea for managing digital content and agent interaction using generic computer functions. Dependent claims (2-14 and 16-19) recite additional information processing or user interface customization steps but do not add meaningful limitations that would change the conclusion of abstraction. Therefore, claims 1-20 are directed to abstract idea.
Step 2A- Prong Two: The claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The steps are implemented on a generic computing system using conventional user interface (message control, input control dialog box). The claims do not recite any specific improvement to computer technology or user interface. The multimedia content analysis and agent selection are described functionally, not tied to any novel or technological implementation. There is no indication that the claims provide technological benefit or solves a technical problem in a novel way.
Step 2B: the additional elements, analyzed individually or in combination, do not add an inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application. The plying interface, input control and message control are generic graphical user interface elements. The understanding of multimedia content is claimed broadly with no specific algorithm or technical implementation recited. The claimed steps are performed using routine and conventional activities. Therefore, claims 1-20 do not recite an inventive step. Th claims are directed to abstract idea and do not include additional element s that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Response to Arguments
Applicants argue the amended claims filed on 12/11/2025 regarding 35 USC § 101 are patent eligible and request the withdrawal of the rejection.
In response, the arguments are not persuasive because simply applying an abstract idea, in this case analyzing multimedia content and facilitating conversation based on that analysis to a specific environment (video playback) does not transform it into patent eligible subject matter. The claims remain directed to the abstract idea itself regardless of the specific context. The recited machine learning model is claimed purely functionally, without any structural or technical specificity describing how it processes content and the additional elements such as message control, conversation interface, playing interface, are simply generic user interface components performing conventional display functions. The argued improvement in “user efficiency” is a user experience benefit rather than a technical improvement to the computer or system, and limiting an abstract idea to a particular technological environment or claiming the benefits of the abstract idea itself as the improvement is insufficient to establish patent eligibility. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARGON N NANO whose telephone number is (571)272-4007. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM. M.S.T..
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571 272 3889. 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.
/SARGON N NANO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights