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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Duan (US 20140122407 A1).
Claim 1 Duan teaches an information processing apparatus comprising a controller (FIG. 1, Processor 140) and being configured to provide a chatbot service, (FIG. 1, Chat Engine 142) wherein the controller is configured to:
generate a message to a user of a chatbot; (FIG. 2, 213, ¶0051, generating a prompt to a user of the provided chat engine 142)
automatically generate a plurality of next input candidates for the user (FIG. 3, 302A-302B, ¶0058, generate a plurality of candidate input messages 302) in response to the message according to content of a dialogue with the user; (FIG. 3, 304, ¶0057, in response to the dialogue 304 with the user)
automatically determine whether a number of selections to be made by the user from among the input candidates is limited to one according to the content of the dialogue with the user; (¶0083, wherein it is determined that the user can adopt any one of the candidate input messages according to the dialogue 304 with the user) and
generate display information indicating a display mode for the input candidates according to whether the number of selections is limited to one. (FIG. 4A, input indicator 412, ¶0083, wherein the display information is displayed according to the selection being limited to one, i.e. wherein the display highlights a single response for selection)
Claim 3 Duan teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the display information does not include information explicitly indicating whether the number of selections is limited to one. (FIG. 4A, input indicator 412, ¶0083, wherein the display information is displayed according to the selection being limited to one, i.e. wherein the display highlights a single response for selection; Examiner notes that there is no explicit statement in the GUI that limits the selectable options to merely one)
Claim 4 is taught by Duan as described for Claim 1.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duan (US 20140122407 A1) in view of HAI DANG, How to prompt? Opportunities and Challenges of Zero- and Few-Shot Learning for Human-AI Interaction in Creative Applications of Generative Models.
Claim 2 Duan teaches Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured to restrict a number of the input candidates upon determining that the number of selections is not limited to one.
From a related technology, Hai Dang teaches wherein the controller is configured to restrict a number of the input candidates upon determining that the number of selections is not limited to one. (FIG. 3, 6.2 “Combining Prompts” wherein the controller restricts the number of input candidates to a number of that is not one, i.e. allowing multiple selections)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventions to modify the teachings of Duan in order to more effectively utilize the chat engine technology by allowing for combinations of prompt responses.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER PALACA CADORNA whose telephone number is (571)270-0584. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571) 272-3964. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P CADORNA/Examiner, Art Unit 2444
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights