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 .
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Magliozzi (2024/0414109 A1), hereinafter “Magliozzi”, and in view of Yu et al. (US 10,659,464 B1, Applicant’s submitted IDS filed 6/30/2025), hereinafter “Yu”.
As per claim 1, Magliozzi teaches:
“an architecture comprising a run time engine, provisioning server, load balancer and a third party protocol gateway” at [0026] and Fig. 1;
(Magliozzi teaches a chatbot system 100 comprising processor 106 (mapped to the claimed “run time engine”), dialogue manager 108 and NLP server 110 (mapped to the claimed “provisioning server”), load balancer 104 (mapped to the claimed “load balancer”) and User communications interface 102 and administrator communications interface 114 (mapped to the claimed “third party protocol gateway”))
“the architecture configured to provisioning and coordination of auto-provisioning artificial intelligence based dialogs by: coordinating, by the run time engine, one or more bot services supplied by a third party via a first external communication channel” at [0026];
(Magliozzi teaches the chatbot system 100 comprising the processor 106 (i.e., “runtime engine”), is configured to provision and coordination of a chatbot service)
“communicating, by the load balancer, with one or more external services via a second external communication channel to perform one or more of: balancing internet traffic across multiple geographies, providing disaster recovery capability and providing high availability” at [0027];
(Magliozzi teaches the load balancer 104 analyses user interaction (i.e. “external services”) to distribute and optimizes the workload for the dialogue manager 108, the NLP server 110, the first communications interface 102 and the second communication interface 114)
“establishing, by the third party protocol gateway, external communications between the architecture and one or more third party platforms via a third external communication channel” at [0027];
(Magliozzi teaches the first communications interface 102 enables bidirectional communication between a user and the chatbot system 100; the second communication interface 114 enables bidirectional communication between an administrator and the chatbot system 100)
“sending, by the third party protocol gateway, text or voice-based messages to be processed downstream by a contact center platform or digital engagement platform” at [0029], [0034].
(Magliozzi teaches the user initiates a conversation with the chatbot system 100 by sending messages from his or her phone or computer via the first communications interface 102. The dialogue manger 108 can then then trigger a workflow to engage the user in conversation, the workflow can include a sequence of operations to ask the user follow-up questions, chat with the user, obtain responses, and store them in the database)
Magliozzi does not explicitly teach “obtaining credential and access tokens, by the provisioning server, from third party platforms and applications” as claimed. However, Yu teaches a method for securely authenticating a chatbot user including the step of “obtaining credential and access tokens, by the provisioning server, from third party platforms and applications” at Col. 6 line 35 to Col. 8 line 65 and Figs. 2-3. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine You with Magliozzi’s teaching because “by utilizing these steps, the third-party application servers, the bot website server, and the electronic devices associated with the system…may all communicate silently (or invisibly) to the user. Furthermore, the user and/or the developer may not incur an additional burden. For instance, successful authentication of the user may occur without the user being required to manually copy and past a magic number and/or without the developer being required to verify a signature”, as suggested by Yu at Col. 8 line 65 to Col. 9 line 5.
As per claim 2, Magliozzi and Yu teach the architecture of claim 1 discussed above. Yu also teaches: wherein the architecture is further configured to provide provisioning and coordination of auto-provisioning artificial intelligence based dialogs by: providing, by the provisioning server, secret API keys; obtaining, by the provisioning server, artificial intelligence or deploy codes from third party artificial intelligence platforms; and supplying, by the provisioning server, token and secret exchange to validate credentialed users of an administration and authorization site” at Col. 6 line 35 to Col. 8 line 65 and Figs. 2-3.
As per claim 3, Magliozzi and Yu teach the system of claim 1 discussed above. Magliozzi also teaches: wherein “the one or more external services comprise one or more DNS services” at [0026]-[0027].
As per claim 4, Magliozzi and Yu teach the architecture of claim 1 discussed above. Magliozzi also teaches: wherein “the third party protocol gateway comprises one or more of: protocols, instructions, and credentials for communicating with one or more of: one or more third party automatic call distributors, email delivery platforms, text gateways, chat platforms, websites and social sites” at [0029]-[0030].
As per claim 5, Magliozzi and Yu teach the system of claim 1 discussed above. Magliozzi also teaches: wherein “the text or voice-based messages are distributed among customer service representatives” at [0041].
As per claim 6, Magliozzi and Yu teach the architecture of claim 1 discussed above. Magliozzi also teaches: wherein “the architecture is further configured to provide provisioning and coordination of auto-provisioning artificial intelligence based dialogs by: redirecting, by the load balancer, communications from a failed component to a working component to establish redundancy in a network” at [0031]-[0032]
As per claim 7, Magliozzi and Yu teach the architecture of claim 1 discussed above. Magliozzi also teaches: wherein “the third party protocol gateway comprises: a plurality of communication applications configured to pass command and control information between the architecture and one or more third party platforms” at [0026]-[0027].
Claims 8-20 recite similar limitations as in claims 1-7 and are therefore rejected by the same reasons.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner respectfully traverses Applicant’s arguments.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argued that Magliozzi does not teach or suggest the distinct components of the claimed architecture because Magliozzi does not disclose a provisioning server. On the contrary, Magliozzi teaches at Fig. 1 a chatbot system 100 comprising processor 106 (mapped to the claimed “run time engine”), dialogue manager 108 and NLP server 110 (mapped to the claimed “provisioning server”), load balancer 104 (mapped to the claimed “load balancer”) and User communications interface 102 and administrator communications interface 114 (mapped to the claimed “third party protocol gateway”). Magliozzi therefore teaches all distinct components of the claimed architecture as recited in the claim.
Applicant further argued that “the Examiner attempts to map a single element of Magliozzi to multiple distinct claimed components”. On the contrary, as explained above, each of the component of the Magliozzi’s system is clearly mapped to a single component of the claimed architecture.
Applicant further argued that Magliozzi does not teach “establishing, by the third party protocol gateway, external communications between the architecture and one or more third party platforms via a third external communication channel” as claimed. On the contrary, Magliozzi teaches at [0027] the first communications interface 102 enables bidirectional communication between a user and the chatbot system 100 (i.e., “external communications”); the second communication interface 114 also enables bidirectional communication between an administrator and the chatbot system 100(i.e., “external communications”) via a different communication channels, as shown in Fig. 1 reproduced below.
PNG
media_image1.png
720
1011
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant further argued that “Magliozzi does not teach or suggest the claimed load balancer communicating with external services”. On the contrary, Magliozzi teaches at [0027] the load balancer 104 analyses user interaction (i.e. “external services”) to distribute and optimizes the workload (i.e., “to perform one or more of: balancing internet traffic across multiple geographies”) for the dialogue manager 108, the NLP server 110, the first communications interface 102 and the second communication interface 114)
Applicant further argued that Magliozzi does not teach or suggest the distinct external communication channels, and “Magliozzi fails to teach or suggest the newly recited requirement that the coordinating occurs “via a first external communication channel”, that the load balancer communicates “via a second external communication channel”, and that the third party protocol gateway establishes external communications “via third external communication channel”. On the contrary, as shown in Magliozzi’s Fig. 1 above, each of the components of the system 100 communicates with other components via a different communication channel, represented by bi-directional arrow between the components.
In light of the foregoing arguments, the 35 U.S.C 103 rejection is hereby sustained.
Conclusion
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 KHANH B PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-4116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am to 4pm.
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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached at (571)272-4098. 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.
/KHANH B PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166
August 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights