Patent Application 18762169 - INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODS AND APPARATUS - Rejection

Patent Application 18762169 - INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODS AND APPARATUS

Title: INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODS AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICES, AND STORAGE MEDIA

Application Information

• Invention Title: INFORMATION PROCESSING METHODS AND APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICES, AND STORAGE MEDIA
• Application Number: 18762169
• Submission Date: 2025-04-09T00:00:00.000Z
• Effective Filing Date: 2024-07-02T00:00:00.000Z
• Filing Date: 2024-07-02T00:00:00.000Z
• Examiner Employee Number: 72204
• Art Unit: 2146
• Tech Center: 2100

Rejection Summary

• 102 Rejections: 0
• 103 Rejections: 1

Cited Patents

No patents were cited in this rejection.

Office Action Text

    Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA  or AIA  Status
1.	The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .

	2.	The amendment filed 2/21/25 has been entered.  Although the amended independent claims now recite language that was previously indicated as containing allowable subject matter, nevertheless further consideration has resulted in the realization of a 112 issue changing the interpretation of the claims.  This in tandem with a subsequent consideration of the references used in the previous Action as well as additional prior art discovered in an updated search, has resulted in the retraction of previously indicated allowable subject matter.  Examiner contacted Applicant’s Representative to discuss the matter and to develop remedied claim language to yet overcome the prior art.  Applicant’s Representative is welcome to contact Examiner after reviewing this Action. 

The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b)  CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.


The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.



4.	Claims 1-8, 11, and 14-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.  Independent claim 1 lines 15-17 recite “wherein the one or more second objectives comprise the one or more second sub-objectives and the one or more second sub-objectives have correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold.”  Note the alternative recitation and one or more second sub-objectives may simply mean one sub-objective.  However a correlation is between two items, and this claim language does not clarify with what the second sub-objective is correlated.  Note that the first line cited here is specifying that the one second objective comprises the one second sub-objective; therefore the claim is not discussing a correlation between the second sub-objective and itself, but that anyway would not provide any useful or additional weight to the claim because that is just the trivial solution of 1.  The recitation cited thus renders independent claim 1 vague and indefinite.  Independent claim 16 lines 17-19 recite the same features and is vague and indefinite for the same reasons.  The dependent claims 2-8, 11, 14-15, 17-20, and 24 do not remedy the issue and are rejected as well.  For purposes of examination this feature is being interpreted to mean a correlation between the second sub-objective and the first sub-objective.  Independent claim 21 lines 13-14 recite “displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives with correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold…”  One or more may simply mean one, and thus this recites displaying one second objective with a correlation greater than the preset correlation threshold.  However, a correlation is between two items and this claim language does not clarify with what the second objective is correlated.  Hence this language renders the claim vague and indefinite.  Independent claim 16 lines 24-25 recite the same features and is further vague and indefinite for the same reasons.  Dependent claims 22-23 do not remedy the issue and are rejected as well.  For purposes of examination this feature is being interpreted to mean a correlation between the second objective and the first objective.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5.	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.

6.	Claim(s) 1-8, 11, 14-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenney et al “Kenney” (CN 103210405) and Sar et al “Sar” (US 10,949,448 B1) and Sun (CN 114683268A).
(Please see the attached copy of Sun and the previously attached copies of Kenney and Sar that number paragraphs in the same manner as that used in the Action).

7.	Regarding claim 1, Kenney shows an information processing method, comprising: displaying a first task information entry and a user control of a second user associated with the first task information entry on a task interface of a first user (para 70, 95, 97, 102, Figure 1 show displaying the first user task interface with associated information and with second user information associated with the task); obtaining at least one second task information entry of the second user in response to a preset operation on the user control (para 74, 93 show acquiring second task information associated with the second user in response to a predetermined or preset query operation); displaying a task sub-interface of the second user on the task interface of the first user (para 13, 15, Figure 1 show the second portion of the task interface of the first user containing the associated task information of the second user task interface).  The first task information entry comprises a first objective and a first sub-objective and the at least one second task information entry comprises a second objective associated with the first objective and a second sub-objective comprised in the second objective (Kenney para 74, 84, 87, 91 show the first and second task information include associated first and second workflow objects and sub-objects that are included within the objects).  Kenney does not explicitly show displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user based on a correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry.  Sar however does show displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user based on a correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry (para 8, 31-35, claim 19 shows displaying the second task information displayed on another portion of the interface corresponding to the second user based on the correlation between the second task information and the first task information).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.   Neither Kenney nor Sar explicitly show comparing a correlation between the second sub-objective and the first sub-objective with a preset correlation threshold, and displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives on the task sub-interface of the second user, wherein the one or more second sub-objectives have correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold, but Kenney shows as noted above the one or more second objectives comprise the one or more second sub-objectives, and Sar para 33-35 does show correlations between task action collections.  Sun however shows comparing a correlation between the second sub-objective and the first sub-objective with a preset correlation threshold, and displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives on the task sub-interface of the second user, wherein the one or more second sub-objectives have correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold (para 110, 114, 122, 133 show comparing a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task with a preset correlation threshold, and providing the one or more second tasks whose second sub-tasks have correlations  with first sub-tasks greater than the preset correlation threshold.  See also the 112 rejection and how this feature is interpreted as a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, especially as modified by Sar, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.   

8.	Regarding claim 2, the displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user based on the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry comprises: comparing the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry with a preset correlation threshold; and displaying a second task information entry with the correlation greater than the correlation threshold on the task sub-interface of the second user (Sar para 31-35, 65 shows the correlation is calculated and if it meets a threshold then the second task information is displayed).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.

9.	Regarding claim 3, the displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user based on the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry further comprises: displaying all the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user in response to determining that the correlation between any of the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry is less than or equal to the correlation threshold (Sar para 31-35, 65 shows the correlation is calculated and if it meets a threshold, which may be less than a particular value, then the second task information is displayed).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.


10.	Regarding claim 4, in addition to that mentioned for claim 2, the displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user (which in view of Sar would be based on the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry) further comprises: providing a unfold control on the task sub-interface of the second user; and in response to a preset operation on the unfold control, displaying all the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user (Kenney para 102 shows the expand control and expanding the list of second task information).

11.	Regarding claim 5, in addition to that mentioned for claim 4, the displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user (which in view of Sar would be based on the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry) further comprises: providing a fold control on the task sub-interface of the second user; and in response to a preset operation on the fold control, displaying the second task information entry with the correlation greater than the correlation threshold on the task sub-interface of the second user (Kenney para 102 shows the expand/collapse control and collapsing the second task information list).

12.	Regarding claim 6, the displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user based on a correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry comprises: sorting the at least one second task information entry based on the correlation between the at least one piece of second task information and the first task information entry and displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user in a descending order of the correlation between the at least one piece of second task information and the first task information entry (Sar para 31-35, 65 shows the second task information is listed in order of highest correlation between the first and second task information.  Sun para 150, 153 also show determining correlation in factors such as time and space and ordering the display of the most relevant/correlated first and second tasks). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user has priority to be displayed with respect to the first task.  

13.	Regarding claim 7, in addition to that mentioned for claim 6, the displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user in descending order of the correlation between the at least one piece of second task information and the first task information entry comprises: displaying the at least one second task information entry and the correlation between the at least one piece of second task information and the first task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user in descending order of the correlation between the at least one piece of second task information and the first task information entry (Sar para 31-35, 65 shows the second task information is listed in order of correlation between the first and second task information.  Sun para 150, 153 also show determining correlation in factors such as time and space and ordering the display of the most relevant/correlated first and second tasks). It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user has priority to be displayed with respect to the first task.  

14.	Regarding claim 8, in addition to that mentioned for claim 6, the displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user in descending order of the correlation between the at least one piece of second task information and the first task information entry comprises: displaying one or more second task information entries with correlations greater than the correlation threshold on the task sub-interface of the second user in descending order of the correlation between the at least one piece of second task information and the first task information entry (Sar para 31-35, 65 shows the second task information is listed in order of correlation between the first and second task information, and filtered to be at least higher than a given threshold).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user has priority to be displayed with respect to the first task.

15.	Regarding claim 11, in addition to that mentioned for claim 1, the displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives and one or more second sub-objectives on the task sub-interface of the second user comprises: for any second objective of the one or more second objectives, in response to determining that the correlation between at least one second sub-objective comprised in the second objective and the first sub-objective is greater than the preset correlation threshold, displaying the second objective and the at least one second sub-objective with the correlation greater than the correlation threshold (Sun para 110, 114, 122, 133 show comparing a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task with a preset correlation threshold, and providing the one or more second tasks whose second sub-tasks have correlations with first sub-tasks greater than the preset correlation threshold and note the second sub-tasks themselves are provided as well.  See also the 112 rejection and how this feature is interpreted as a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, especially as modified by Sar, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.   

13.	Regarding claim 12, wherein: the first task information entry comprises a first objective; and the at least one second task information entry comprises a second objective associated with the first objective and a second sub-objective comprised in the second objective (Kenney para 74, 84, 87, 91 show the first and second task information include associated first and second workflow objects and sub-objects that are within the objects).

16.	Regarding claim 14, the obtaining at least one second task information entry of the second user comprises: obtaining an identifier of the second user and an identifier of the first task information entry from attribute information of the user control and obtaining the at least one second task information entry of the second user from a task management server based on the identifier of the second user and the identifier of the first task information entry (Kenney para 64, and Sar para 26, 65 show obtaining the identifier information and using it to acquire the second task information from the task management server).

17.	Regarding claim 15, in addition to that mentioned for claim 14, Sar para 31-35, 65 shows acquiring the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry.  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.

	18.	Regarding claim 16, (please note the alternative language of each first task information entry embodiment in its own paragraph, the embodiment paragraphs separated by “or”).  Kenney shows an information processing method, comprising: receiving a task information acquisition request from a first user client wherein an identifier of a second user and an identifier of a first task information entry are carried in the task information acquisition request (para 70, 95, 97, 102, Figure 1 show receiving and displaying the first user task interface with associated information and with second user information associated with the task.  Para 17, 59 show the first user client from which this is received); extracting at least one second task information entry of the second user from a data storage system based on the identifier of the second user (para 74, 93 show acquiring second task information associated with the second user in response to a predetermined or preset query operation.  Para 13, 59 show this is from a memory/data storage system); displaying a task sub-interface of the second user on the task interface of the first user (para 13, 15, Figure 1 show the second portion of the task interface of the first user containing the associated task information of the second user task interface).  The first task information entry comprises a first objective and a first sub-objective and the at least one second task information entry comprises a second objective associated with the first objective and a second sub-objective comprised in the second objective (Kenney para 74, 84, 87, 91 show the first and second task information include associated first and second workflow objects and sub-objects that are included within the objects).  Kenney does not explicitly show determining a correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry based on the identifier of the first task information entry, and returning the at least one second task information entry and the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry to the first client.  Sar however does show determining a correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry based on the identifier of the first task information entry, and returning the at least one second task information entry and the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry to the first client (para 8, 31-35, claim 19 shows displaying the second task information displayed on another portion of the interface corresponding to the second user based on the correlation between the second task information entry and the first task information entry).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.   Neither Kenney nor Sar explicitly show comparing a correlation between the second sub-objective and the first sub-objective with a preset correlation threshold, and displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives on the task sub-interface of the second user, wherein the one or more second sub-objectives have correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold, but Kenney shows as noted above the one or more second objectives comprise the one or more second sub-objectives, and Sar para 33-35 does show correlations between task action collections.  Sun however shows comparing a correlation between the second sub-objective and the first sub-objective with a preset correlation threshold, and displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives on the task sub-interface of the second user, wherein the one or more second sub-objectives have correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold (para 110, 114, 122, 133 show comparing a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task with a preset correlation threshold, and providing the one or more second tasks whose second sub-tasks have correlations  with first sub-tasks greater than the preset correlation threshold.  See also the 112 rejection and how this feature is interpreted as a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, especially as modified by Sar, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.   

	19.	Regarding claim 17, please note the alternative recitation. In addition to that mentioned for claim 16, the extracting at least one second task information entry of the second user from a data storage system based on the identifier of the second user comprises: extracting, from the data storage system, the at least one second task information entry associated with the first task information entry among task information entries of the second user, based on the identifier of the second user and the identifier of the first task information entry (Kenney para 64 and Sar para 26, 65 show obtaining the second task information associated with the first task information among task information of the second user, based on the identifier of the second user and the identifier of the first task information).

20. 	Regarding claim 18, please note the alternative recitation. In addition to that mentioned for claim 16, determining the correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry is based on a textual similarity algorithm (Sar para 46, 63-64 show determining the correlation using a textual similarity algorithm).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine a correlation between textual information.

	21.	Claims 19-20 show the same features as claim 1 and are rejected for the same reason claim 1 is rejected.  In addition, Kenney para 13, 59 for example show the hardware memory and processor.

22.	Regarding claim 21, Kenney shows an information processing method, comprising: displaying a first task information entry and a user control of a second user associated with the first task information entry on a task interface of a first user (para 70, 95, 97, 102, Figure 1 show displaying the first user task interface with associated information and with second user information associated with the task), wherein the first task information entry comprises a first objective (Kenney para 74, 84, 87, 91 show the first and second task information include associated first and second workflow objects and sub-objects that are included within the objects); obtaining at least one second task information entry of the second user in response to a preset operation on the user control (para 74, 93 show acquiring second task information associated with the second user in response to a predetermined or preset query operation), wherein the at least one second task information entry comprises a second objective associated with the first objective and a second sub-objective comprised in the second objective (Kenney para 74, 84, 87, 91 show the first and second task information include associated first and second workflow objects and sub-objects that are included within the objects); displaying a task sub-interface of the second user on the task interface of the first user (para 13, 15, Figure 1 show the second portion of the task interface of the first user containing the associated task information of the second user task interface).  As noted above, the first task information entry comprises a first objective and a first sub-objective and the at least one second task information entry comprises a second objective associated with the first objective and a second sub-objective comprised in the second objective (Kenney para 74, 84, 87, 91 show the first and second task information include associated first and second workflow objects and sub-objects that are included within the objects).  Kenney does not explicitly show displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user based on a correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry.  Sar however does show displaying the at least one second task information entry on the task sub-interface of the second user based on a correlation between the at least one second task information entry and the first task information entry (para 8, 31-35, claim 19 shows displaying the second task information displayed on another portion of the interface corresponding to the second user based on the correlation between the second task information and the first task information).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.   Neither Kenney nor Sar explicitly show comparing a correlation between the second sub-objective and the first sub-objective with a preset correlation threshold, and displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives on the task sub-interface of the second user, wherein the one or more second sub-objectives have correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold, but Kenney shows as noted above the one or more second objectives comprise the one or more second sub-objectives, and Sar para 33-35 does show correlations between task action collections.  Sun however shows comparing a correlation between the second sub-objective and the first sub-objective with a preset correlation threshold, and displaying, one by one, one or more second objectives on the task sub-interface of the second user, wherein the one or more second sub-objectives have correlations greater than the preset correlation threshold (para 110, 114, 122, 133 show comparing a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task with a preset correlation threshold, and providing the one or more second tasks whose second sub-tasks have correlations  with first sub-tasks greater than the preset correlation threshold.  See also the 112 rejection and how this feature is interpreted as a correlation between the second sub-task and the first sub-task).  It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have this in Kenney, especially as modified by Sar, because it would provide an efficient way to determine what task information of the second user to display with respect to the first task.   

	23.	Claim 22 shows the same features as claim 21 and is rejected for the same reasons.  In addition, Kenney para 13, 59 show the memory, processor, and computer program stored in memory and executable on the processor to execute the program and run the method. 

	24.	Claim 23 shows the same features as claim 21 and is rejected for the same reasons.  In addition, Kenney para 13, 59 show the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (memory) storing computer instructions which when executed by a computer cause it to perform the method. 

25.	Claim 24 shows the same features as claim 16 and is rejected for the same reasons.  In addition, Kenney para 13, 59 show the memory, processor, and computer program stored in memory and executable on the processor to execute the program and run the method. 

	
26.	Applicant's arguments/remarks filed 2/21/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.  As mentioned in the beginning of the Action, new prior art has been discovered as well as the new claim interpretation and 112 rejection, and in view of the aforementioned the indication of allowability has been removed.  

Conclusion
27.	The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
a)	Dahn (US 11868936 B2) shows calculating correlations between first and second task information and associated user information.
b) 	Chen (CN 112347387 B) show displaying multi-level task associations. 

28.	Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN PAUL SAX whose telephone number is (571)272-4072. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 - 6:00 Est.
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, Andrew Jung can be reached on 571-270-3779. 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.
/STEVEN P SAX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2146