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 .
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 Action is responsive to the Applicant’s Amendment/Remarks filed on 08/28/2026. In the Amendment, applicant amended claims 2, 7, 9 and 16. Claims 1, 8 and 15 are cancelled. As necessitated by the Amendment, Examiner hereby respectfully maintains double patenting rejection to claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-21.
As to Arguments and Remarks filed in the Amendment, please see Examiner’s responses shown after Rejections - 35 U.S.C § 103.
Please note claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-21 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 05/27/2026 and 08/28/2026 has been considered (see form-1449, MPEP 609).
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.
Claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,610,080, and over claims 1-12 of Patent No. 11,971,933. Although the conflicting are not patentably distinct from each other because since the claims of the Patent No. 12,610,080 and 11,971,933 contains every element of the claims of the instant application, and as such, anticipate the claims of the instant application 19,240438. (See table below).
Instant Application claim 1
Patent No. xxx claim 1
A computer-implemented method for an expanded search, the method comprising:
analyzing, by a processor, semi-private data associated with a user, the semi-private data originating from a plurality of disparate data sources;
generating, based on the analysis, correlated metadata that defines a relationship between individual items of the semi-private data wherein the semi-private data comprises a first item of the semi-private data from a first data source and a second item of the semi-private data from a second data source, wherein the relationship is defined based on a common attribute shared between the first item and the second item, wherein the correlated metadata represents information not present in metadata originally associated with the individual items of the semi-private data;
storing the correlated metadata in a controlled access non-transient memory; receiving a search request from the user; in response to the search request, utilizing the correlated metadata to determine a primary response comprising first information directly responsive to the search request and an expanded response comprising second information contextually related to the search request, wherein the second information of the expanded response comprises information not explicitly requested in the search request; and
providing the primary response and the expanded response to the user.
A computer-implemented method for artificial intelligence (AI) assisted expanded search, the computer-implemented method comprising: analyzing relationships between disparate items of first semi-private data and first metadata associated with the disparate items, wherein the first semi-private data resides on a controlled access non-transient memory; generating the correlated metadata, the correlated metadata comprising data points that represent the relationships, wherein the data points are not present in the first metadata; storing the correlated metadata; receiving at a server, from a user, a user search request for searching the first semi-private data; determining, by a processor, a primary response that includes second semi-private data selected from the first semi-private data, wherein determining the primary response comprises: accessing the first metadata and the correlated metadata related to the user search request and the first semi-private data; and analyzing the first metadata and the correlated metadata to determine the primary response to the user search request; processing, by an AI search assistant, the second semi-private data to generate a feature based on the second semi-private data; generating, by the AI search assistant, a search query to an independent search engine based on the feature generated from the second semi-private data; receiving an independent result from the independent search engine; generating, by the AI search assistant, an expanded response, wherein generating the expanded response comprises: identifying, based on the data points within the correlated metadata, additional information within the first semi-private data that is inferred to be of interest based on the user search request; generating the expanded response by combining the independent result with the additional information; and returning the expanded response to the user.
Claims 1-10 of Patent No. 12,3610080 satisfies all the elements of claims 2-8 of the instant application, and as such, anticipates the claims of instant application.
Claims 1-10 of Patent No. 12,3610080 satisfies all the elements of claims 9-15 of the instant application, and as such, anticipates the claims of instant application.
Claims 11-20 of Patent No. 12,3610080 satisfies all the elements of claims 16-21 of the instant application, and as such, anticipates the claims of instant application.
Instant Application claim 1
Patent No. 11,971,933 claim 1
A computer-implemented method for an expanded search, the method comprising:
analyzing, by a processor, semi-private data associated with a user, the semi-private data originating from a plurality of disparate data sources;
generating, based on the analysis, correlated metadata that defines a relationship between individual items of the semi-private data wherein the semi-private data comprises a first item of the semi-private data from a first data source and a second item of the semi-private data from a second data source, wherein the relationship is defined based on a common attribute shared between the first item and the second item, wherein the correlated metadata represents information not present in metadata originally associated with the individual items of the semi-private data;
storing the correlated metadata in a controlled access non-transient memory; receiving a search request from the user; in response to the search request, utilizing the correlated metadata to determine a primary response comprising first information directly responsive to the search request and an expanded response comprising second information contextually related to the search request, wherein the second information of the expanded response comprises information not explicitly requested in the search request; and
providing the primary response and the expanded response to the user.
A method for assisted expanded search, comprising the steps of: receiving at a server, from a user, a user search request to access storing semi-private data, wherein the semi-private data resides on a controlled access non-transient memory, wherein the semi-private data is personal to the user, and wherein the semi-private data comprises a plurality of data items having related thereto, in the controlled access non-transient memory, semi-private metadata and semi-private correlated metadata, the semi-private correlated metadata automatically generated from interpreting other data, wherein the semi-private correlated metadata links the plurality of data items and includes additional information than in the semi-private metadata, and wherein the other data comprises the semi-private metadata; and servicing the user search request, wherein servicing the user search request comprises: accessing the semi-private metadata and the semi-private correlated metadata, wherein the semi-private metadata and the semi-private correlated metadata are personal to the user; analyzing, using a processor running instructions to implement at least one algorithm for a search engine, the semi-private metadata and the semi-private correlated metadata to determine a primary response to the user search request; analyzing, using a processor running instructions to implement at least one algorithm for an artificial intelligence (AI) search assistant, the semi-private metadata and the semi-private correlated metadata to determine an expanded response to the user search request; and providing, to the user, the primary response and the expanded response.
Claims 1-5 of Patent No. 11,971,933 satisfies all the elements of claims 2-8 of the instant application, and as such, anticipates the claims of instant application.
Claims 6-12 of Patent No. 11,971,933 satisfies all the elements of claims 9-15 of the instant application, and as such, anticipates the claims of instant application.
Claims 6-12 of Patent No. 11,971,933 satisfies all the elements of claims 16-21 of the instant application, and as such, anticipates the claims of instant application.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their 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.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aziz et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0154360, hereinafter Aziz), in view of Holman et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0106947, hereinafter Holman), and further in view of Pavlidis et al. (US PGPUB 2014/0369595, hereinafter Pavlidis).
As per as claim 2, Aziz discloses:
(Currently Amended) A computer-implemented method for an expanded search, the method
comprising:
analyzing, by a processor, semi-private data associated with a user, the semi-private data originating from a plurality of disparate data sources (Aziz, e.g., fig. 2, associating with texts description, [0060-0065], “... determine the portions of a centralized interface, if any, to which the care provider may transmit information for storage and access by other authorized individuals, while the access level of a care provider can determine the portions of the centralized interface... one or more other individuals (e.g., family members of a patient, friends, and/or other individuals associated with a patient) may be authorized to access the interface...”);
generating, based on the analysis, correlated metadata that defines relationships between individual items of the semi-private data, wherein the semi-private data comprises a first item of the semi-private data from a first data source and a second item of the semi-private data from a second data source, wherein the relationship is defined based on a common attribute shared between the first item and the second item, wherein the correlated metadata represents information not present in metadata originally associated with the individual items of the semi-private data (Aziz, e.g., [0013], “...a medical provider could provide updates to multiple family members of a patient and/or other associated care providers regarding a patient's health status, or a facility staff member could broadcast a reminder regarding an upcoming activity...” and [0060-0066], “…authorized individual can be queried, and the additional item of information can be stored in the centralized interface if the individual's input level is sufficient… [0071-0075], “…queried as to the care locations associated with a patient…editing/modifying/updating of care locations associated with the selected patient may include updating the care locations that the system has associated with the selected patient…searching for other care locations that are known to the system…”), (the examiner asserts updating/modify which is equivalent of information not present in metadata originally associated with individual);
storing the correlated metadata in a controlled access non-transient memory (Aziz, e.g., [0060-0064] and [0068], “...information for storage and access by other authorized individuals... information can be stored in the centralized interface ...”);
receiving a search request from the user (Aziz, e.g., [0065-0066], “…when information is inputted into the interface, the information can also be simultaneously sent directly to one or more authorized parties, e.g., via a text/SMS message, e-mail, a hyperlink transmitted via text/SMS message or e-mail, voice message, a message via a mobile application, or a similar medium…directly from the transmitting party…”);
in response to the search request, utilizing the correlated metadata to determine a primary response comprising first information directly responsive to the search request and an expanded response comprising second information contextually related to the search request, (Aziz, e.g., [0040], [0063-0065], [0069] and [0085], “…queried, and the additional item of information… sent directly to one or more authorized parties, e.g., via a text/SMS message, e-mail, a hyperlink transmitted via text/SMS message or e-mail, voice message, a message via a mobile application, or a similar medium…directly from the transmitting party…”), wherein the second information of the expanded response comprises information not explicitly requested in the search request (Aziz, e.g., [0048-0050], “...add and/or modify information to the activity information (14) portion of the interface (10) (e.g., for access by others), and a sufficient access level to access (e.g., display) information contained within the activities information (14) portion of the interface...” and see [0074-0075], “...editing/modifying of care locations associated with the selected patient may include updating the care locations that the system has associated with the selected patient (416), deleting any care locations that the system has associated with the selected patient (416), searching for other care locations that are known to the system (418), and/or adding new care locations to the system (420). The authorized individual may then assign one or more of the known or new care locations to the selected patient...”); and
providing the primary response and the expanded response to the user (Aziz, e.g., [0040], [0066], [0071], “… transmitted via text/SMS message or e-mail, telephone/voice message, a message sent via a mobile application, or similar means) could be transmitted to one or more registered persons and/or other authorized individuals…”).
To make records clearer regarding to the language of “utilizing the correlated metadata to determine a primary response comprising first information” (although as stated above, Aziz functional disclose the features of correlated metadata to determine information (Aziz, e.g., [0040], [0063-0065], [0069] and [0085]).
However Holman, in an analogous art, discloses “utilizing the correlated metadata to determine a primary response comprising first information” (Holman, e.g., [0268-0270], [0311], “...privacy metadata correlated to an entity-associated privacy beacon receiving module may include one or more sub-logic... privacy metadata correlated to an entity-associated privacy beacon detected by the image capture device receiving...”. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art BEFORE the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Holman and Aziz to generating a valuation of the image, said valuation at least partly based on one or more of the privacy metadata and the representation of the feature of the entity in the image (Holman, e.g., [abstract]).
To further clarify the features of “wherein the semi-private data comprises a first item of the semi-private data from a first data source and a second item of the semi-private data from a second data source, wherein the relationship is defined based on a common attribute shared between the first item and the second item”
However Pavlidis, in an analogous art, discloses “wherein the semi-private data comprises a first item of the semi-private data from a first data source and a second item of the semi-private data from a second data source, wherein the relationship is defined based on a common attribute shared between the first item and the second item” (Pavlidis, e.g., [0046-0049], “…, the comparison metric sub-part compares the collected image and metadata information established in the query analysis sub-part to existing images stored in database…analysis to find the most similar facades in database 206 to the collected image …similar images collected from the database for comparison…uniqueness of color is often used as a descriptor for a region of an image. Other descriptors include shapes, motion, and texture. The identified descriptors are utilized to correlate similar images…”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art BEFORE the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Pavlidis, Holman and Aziz to identify similar attribute to correlate similar image for each region of the correlated stored image is matched against each region in the collected image (Pavlidis, e.g., [0049-0050]).
As per as claim 3, the combination of Holman and Aziz disclose:
(Previously Presented) The method of claim 2, wherein the plurality of disparate data sources comprises at least two selected from the group consisting of: an email service, a cloud file storage service, a social media service, and a collaboration service (Aziz, e.g., [0005], [0012-0013], “...email or text/SMS message, voice message, a communication via a mobile application, or other types of media...”).
As per as claim 4, the combination of Holman and Aziz disclose:
(Previously Presented) The method of claim 2, wherein analyzing the semi-private data comprises performing image recognition on image data within the semi-private data to extract one or more features used to generate the correlated metadata (Holman, e.g., [0260-0261], “... image analysis and data extraction module 932, which may perform analysis on the encrypted image...” and [0268-0270]).
As per as claim 5, the combination of Holman and Aziz disclose:
(Previously Presented) The method of claim 2, wherein generating the expanded response further comprises: formulating an independent inquiry for an independent search engine, the independent inquiry being based on the search request or the primary response (Aziz, e.g., fig. 2, associating with texts description, [0041], [0063-0065], [0074-0075], (allow user to search and access patient records/data);
acquiring an independent search result from the independent search engine; and
including the independent search result as part of the expanded response engine (Aziz, e.g., [0065-0066], “…when information is inputted into the interface, the information can also be simultaneously sent directly to one or more authorized parties, e.g., via a text/SMS message, e-mail, a hyperlink transmitted via text/SMS message or e-mail, voice message, a message via a mobile application, or a similar medium…directly from the transmitting party…”).
As per as claim 6, the combination of Holman and Aziz disclose:
(Previously Presented) The method of claim 5, wherein formulating the independent inquiry is based on a feature identified within the primary response engine (Aziz, e.g., [0065-0066], “…when information is inputted into the interface, the information can also be simultaneously sent directly to one or more authorized parties, e.g., via a text/SMS message, e-mail, a hyperlink transmitted via text/SMS message or e-mail, voice message, a message via a mobile application, or a similar medium…directly from the transmitting party…”).
As per as claim 7, the combination of Holman and Aziz disclose:
(Currently Amended) The method of claim 2, wherein the first item of the semi-private data comprises an image and the with a second item of the semi-private data comprises a calendar entry (Aziz, e.g., [006], [0011-0012], [0040], [0049], [0053], “...multiple activities/events (e.g., using calendar software), including, for example, an activity title, date, location, and other notes, and/or the health benefits of the activity... scheduled event (e.g., via e-mail, a text/SMS message, a voice message, a communication via a mobile application, or other types of media)” and [0064-0066], “…authorized individual can be queried, and the additional item of information can be stored in the centralized interface if the individual's input level is sufficient… [0071-0075], “…queried as to the care locations associated with a patient…editing/modifying of care locations associated with the selected patient may include updating the care locations that the system has associated with the selected patient…searching for other care locations that are known to the system…”), further see (Pavlidis, e.g., [0046-0049]).
Claims 9-14 are essentially the same as claims 2-7 except that they set forth the claimed invention as a system rather a method, respectively and correspondingly, therefore is rejected under the same reasons set forth in rejections of claims 2-8.
Claims 16-21 are essentially the same as claims 2-7 except that they set forth the claimed invention as a non-transitory computer readable medium rather a method, respectively and correspondingly, therefore is rejected under the same reasons set forth in rejections of claims 2-8.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner respectfully reminds applicant of the broadest reasonable interpretation standard (See MPEP 2111), "During examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow." In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 367 F.3d 1359, 1369, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (The USPTO uses a different standard for construing claims than that used by district courts; during examination the USPTO must give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation.) In Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 75 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2005), the court further elaborated on the “broadest reasonable interpretation" standard and recognized that “The Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO") determines the scope of claims in patent applications not solely on the basis of the claim language, but upon giving claims their broadest reasonable construction." Thus, when interpreting claims, the courts have held that Examiners should (1) interpret claim terms as broadly as their terms reasonably allows and (2) interpret claim phrases as broadly as their construction reasonably allows.
Applicant’s arguments filed 08/28/2026 with respect to claims 2-7, 9-14 and 16-21 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by applicant's amendment to the claims. Applicant's newly amended features are taught implicitly, expressly, or impliedly by the prior art of record (See the new ground(s) of rejection set forth herein above).
Issue I: Regarding to obviousness type double patenting rejection to claims -7, 9-14 and 16-21 as being unpatentable over claim 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,361,080 and over claims 1-12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,971,933.
Response I: Applicant requests that the rejection be held in abeyance by the Examiner until otherwise allowable subject matter is indicated.
Issue II: Applicant argued on pages 7-8 (Remarks/Argument) regarding 103 rejections.
Response II: See above new ground rejection.
The Examiner respectfully submits that, with respect to the totally newly amended subject matter, the Examiner respectfully cited proper paragraphs from cited reference to reject the claim in responsive to the newly amended, please refer to the corresponding section of the office action.
Additional Art Considered
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the Applicants’ disclosure.
The following patents and papers are cited to further show the state of the art at the time of Applicants’ invention with respect to utilizing artificial intelligence to assist a user in searching and retrieving digital data which assisted expanded search can have a server, receiving from a user, a user search request to access semi-private data, and a controlled access non-transient memory storing at least the semi-private data and analyze semi-private metadata and semi-private correlated metadata related to the semi-private data to determine a primary response and an expanded response to the user search request.
a. Rhoads et al. (US PGPUB 2014/0080428, hereafter Rhoads); “Methods, Systems for content processing” discloses “ visual search capabilities, and determining appropriate actions responsive to different image inputs.”
Rhoad also teaches collection of similar images found in a repository of public images [fig. 22, para 50].
Rhoads further teaches image subject may be identified through its shape, color and texture. Image fingerprinting may be used to identify reference images having similar labels, and metadata associated with those other images [0169].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN A PHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3173. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:45 AM - 6:30 PM.
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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached on 571-272-4078. 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.
/TUAN A PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163
Prosecution Insights