—
`
`Surapsisenes.
`Parentemnt
`ds
`?
`‘PatentOtter
`Oftice nerepden
`
` das brevats
`
`
`
`
`:
`Modiano, Micaela Nadia
`Modiane Josif Pisanty & Staub Ltd
`Thierschstrasse 714
`80538: Manehen
`ALLEMAGNE
`
`f
`
`f
`
`“
`
`European Patent Gillon:
`poeusFee
`22be
`Helle
`NETHEBLANOS
`Tob 434 70 340-2040
`Pas a3) 70.340 3018
`
`Formalities Officer
`Name: Benilez Sierra. a
`Tehnat 70 S40 4046
`or.call
`#34 (0170.340 48 9
`‘Substantive Examiner
`Name: Willink,dan Gerhard
`Teli 84-70 340 - 2968
`
`
`
`
`se
`ae
`won aaaae SomtshtbNtnveenr
`
`27,07,.2010
`15617MNMms
`05 752 631.1 + 1243
`
`ic~=~=~SC~<;7;3S;SRE _ ___———————____—_—_—_—_——_—_
`Ixi.Mobille(R&D) Ld.
`
`
`Peetebec PHOTLUEMUEDNLAnenttty
`
`
`
`
`
`Communication pursuantto Article 94(3) EPC
`
`The exarnination of the above-identified application has revealed that it doés not meet the requirementsof the
`European Patent Canventian for the reasons enclosed herewith. If the deficiencies indicated are not rectified
`the application may berefuged pursuant to Article 97(2) EPC,
`
`You. are invited to file your observations and insofar as the deficiencies are such.as.to be rectifiable, to correct
`the indicated deficiencies within a period
`
`of
`
`4 months
`
`fromm the notification-of this communigation, this period being Computed-in accordancewith Rules 126(2) and
`131(2) and {4} EPC. One set of amendments to the description, claims and drawings-is to be filed.withinthe
`said period on separatesheets (A. 504) EPC).
`i filing amendments, you mustidentify them and indicate the basis for them in the application asfiled. Failure
`to. meeteither requirement may lead to a communication from the Examining Division requesting. that you
`correct this deficiency (R. 1837/4) EPC).
`
`Failure to comply with this invitationin due time will resultia the application being deemed to be
`withdrawn (Art. 94(4) EPC).
`
`Registered Letter
`EPO RaviQ004 84.4005%
`
`MICROSOFT CORP. ET AL.
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1004
`
`Page | of 7
`
`Page 1 of 7
`
`

`

` Application No.: 05 752°631.1
`Sheet 2.
`Date'27:07.2010
`
`aes PRtany,
`oe
`2,
`ww
`
`it
`
`"~~
`
`>
`2
`
`3
`
`GO
`
`>
`3
`
`=
`
`4,
`EG go*
`
`r
`
`Wiltink, Jan Gerhard
`Primary Examiner
`For the Examining Division
`
`Enclosure(s)}:
`
`5 pages reasons (Form 2906}
`
`EPO Foi 26e1 GaGCSx.
`
`Page 2 of 7
`
`Page 2 of 7
`
`

`

`Anmelde-Nr:
`Blatt
`Datum
`Application No 05 752 631.1
`Sheet
`Date
`Demande n®
`Feuille
`Date
`nnetinennpnnpuemnNenNtetnereNmtiNLNiNNmtmnnmmretNt
`
`27.07.2040
`
`4
`
`The-examination is being carried out on the following application documents
`
`Deéseription, Pages
`
`14
`
`as: originally fled
`
`Claims, Numbers
`
`1-48"
`
`received on
`
`03-07-2009
`
`with letter-of-
`
`26,06;2009
`
`Drawings, Sheets
`
`1-3
`
`as-originally filed
`
`Ke Oe
`
`4
`
`2
`
`24
`
`Reference is madeto the following documents: the numbering will.be adhered
`to in the rest of the procedure:
`‘D1
`US 5.805 775 A (EBERMAN BRIAN SCOTT[US] ET AL) 8
`September 1998 (1998-09-08)
`
`D2
`
`WO 02/12982 A (OBJECT SERVICES AND CONSULTING [US))
`14 February 2002(2002-02-14) :& US 7.027 975 B1
`(PAZANDAK PAUL N [US] ET AL) 11 April 2006 (2006-04-11)
`
`The presentapplication does not meet the requirements of Article 52(1) EPC:
`because the subject-matter of claims 1 and-8 do not involve an inventive:step
`within the meaning of Article 56 EPC:
`
`Document D1 is considered to be the priorart closest to the method of claim 1
`and discloses:
`
`A method for programminga mebie-communication device (command and
`control a computer system 10.,..)
`based on a high-level code (... using natural language...) comprising
`operative language (... interactions @.column 3,line 6),
`the method comprising:
`EPO For 2806.84.OFTRI
`
`Page 3 of 7
`
`Page 3 of 7
`
`

`

`a.
`Anmelde-Nr:
`Blatt
`Datum
`O05 782 631.1
`Application Ne.
`2
`Stiget
`27.07.2010
`Date
`Demanden*
`Feuille.
`Date
`
`
`parsing (natural language text 161 ... is parsed. by-the parser 130 @
`column 5,line 47 // The parser 130 ... rewritesthe input text by applying
`the rules as indicated @ column6,line 24) the high-level code
`(command phrase ... open the home page of doe @ column 6,line 19)
`for keywords (open the home page @ column6, lines 10, 18, 30, 32,
`(Rule 1), (Rule 4)} to recognize the operative language;
`determining at least one operation (get_home_page @ column 6,lines
`10, 18, 30, 32, (Rule 1), (Rule 4)} associated with the operative
`language:
`determiningwhether high-level.code comprises keywords (of doe)
`defining one or more relationships ("JOHN DOE” @ column6,lines 16,
`28, (Rule 3)) and-conditiens corresponding to. the operative language,
`
`and
`
`producing an executable code (the sub-string: [get_home_page"JOHN
`DOE" will cause a “get_home_page" request 42to be generated by a
`“get_home_page" callback procedure @ column 6,line 47)
`
`that can be executed by asnierocontrolerefthe mobile
`communication device (The string can be immediately interpreted
`by the evaluator 140)
`
`to perform the respective operation (the evaluator 140 can request
`the opening of the JOHN DOE's home page) associaled with the
`operative language,
`
`wherein
`
`the high-level code comprises at least one sentence(open the home
`page of doe @ column 6,line 22)
`
`formatted in accordance. with a first context (natural language input text
`161 @ column 6,tine 20).
`
`2.2
`
`The method of claim 1 therefore differs from this known method in the
`following additional features (indicated above in stikeout-font):
`
`(i) mobile communication
`
`(i)
`
`‘conditions
`
`(iii) microcontrolfer
`
`with their obvious independenttechnical effects of Increased flexibility,
`applicability and.efficiency.
`
`EPS Form 2008.04.99TR)
`
`Page 4 of 7
`
`Page 4 of 7
`
`

`

`_.
`Anmelde-Nr
`Blatt
`Datum
`O05 752 631.1
`Appleation No
`3
`Sheet
`27.07.2016
`Date
`Demande-n®
`Feuille
`Daie
`
`
`2.3
`
`However, these features are described in document D2 as providing the same
`advantages as in the present application:
`
`the thin client includes a computing. device selected from the list
`
`consisting of: personal computer; personal digital assistant; smart.phone
`(mobile communication device);net TV; robotcontroller
`(microcontrollen ; remote controller (microcontroller); and smart
`appliance @ D2,claim 74:
`
`if
`
`The parser 310 ... receives input in the form of sequential source
`program instructions, interactive online commands, markup tags, or
`some other defined interface and breaksthem into parts (for example,
`the nouns (objects), verbs: (methods), andtheir attributes or options
`(relationshios and conditions);@ De, page 11, line 4.
`
`The skilled person would therefore regard it as.a normal design option to
`include these features in the method described in document D1in order to
`solve the problem posed.
`
`Therefore, the subject-matterof claim 1 does not Involve an inventive step
`within the meaning of Article 56 EPC,
`
`The features of independent systern claim 8 correspond one-to-one to those
`of independent method claim 1; therefore, the subject-matter of claim 8 does
`not invalye an inventive step within the meaning of Article56. EPC,
`
`Dependent claims 2-7, 9-15 do not appear to contain any additional features
`which, in combinationwiththe features of any claim to which they refer, meet
`the requirements of the EPC with respect to inventive step, the reasons being
`as follows:
`
`The features relating to elther the mobile communication device or a network
`server performing the parsing and determining steps, relating to a distributed
`environment and transmitting high-level code and executable code (claims
`2-6, 9-13) are disclosed in document D2:
`
`the method 200 operateson a system 100 that includes the Internet as
`the: communicative connector 106 (distributed environrnent béetween.a
`client element 104 and the server element 102, the step 202 ofinputting
`is performedatthe client element 104 and the step 204 of requestingan
`
`2.4
`
`25
`
`3
`
`ay
`
`EPG Fore 2008 01.89 TRI
`
`Page 5 of 7
`
`Page 5 of 7
`
`

`

`.
`..
`Anmelde-Nr:
`Blatt
`Datum
`Applicaton No. O5 782 631.1
`4
`Sheet
`27.07.2046
`Date
`Demande-n'®
`Feuille
`Date
`
`
`appropriate parser is communicated over the communicative connector
`106 to the server element 102. The server element 102 (nelwork server)
`can maintain or make accessible a selection of parser from. among one
`or more parsers. of a so -called."parserfarm”. in this manner, an
`appropriate parser (parsing and determining steps) for theparticular
`input from the client elernent 104 is useable, and the parser need not
`(although it may be)available in or at the client element104 (mobile.
`communication device) itself @ D2, page-8, line 1
`
`if
`
`On selection of the parser in the step 206, the parser in a step 208
`performs aparse of the query or commandinputin the step 202. The
`step 208 Is repeated until a well formed grammarconstituent is specified.
`Onzethe parse in the step 208 is completed, a step 210 returns a
`translation (executable code) from the parser of theparsed: query or
`command @ D2, page 8,line 18.
`
`li
`
`See also D2; page 12, line 12 + page 74, line 20.
`
`3:2
`
`4
`
`44
`
`4.2
`
`The features relating to natural language context and Keywords (claims 7, 14,
`15) are disclosed in document D1; see the passagescited for claim 1.
`
`itis not at present apparent which part of the application could serve as a
`basis for a new, allowable claim. Should the applicant nevertheless regard
`some particular matter as patentable, an independent claim should befiled
`taking account of Rule 43(1) EPC. The applicant should also indicate how the
`subject-matterof the new claim differs fromthe state of the art and the
`significance thereof.
`
`Whenfiling amended claims the applicant shouldat the same time bring the
`descriptioninto conformity with the amended claims. Care should be taken
`duringrevision, especially of the introductory portion and of any statements. of
`problem or advantage, not to add subject-matter which extends beyond the
`content of theapplication as originally filed (Article 123(2) EPC).
`
`Amendments should be made by filing replacement pages. Unnecessary
`recasting of the description should be avoided. An amended abstract is not
`required: The applicant should also take account of the requiremenis of Rule
`
`EPO Form 2008 94.91 TRI
`
`Page 6 of 7
`
`Page 6 of 7
`
`

`

`Anmelde-Nr:
`Blatt
`Datum
`05. 782 6372..1
`Appligation No:
`5
`Sheet
`27.07.2016
`Date
`Demande n%
`‘Feuille
`Date
`
`
`50(1) EPC. If handwritten amendments are.submitted, they should be clearly
`legible to the printer.
`
`4.3
`
`In orderto facilitate the examinationof the conformity of the amended
`application with the requirements ofArticle 123(2) EPC, the applicant should
`olearly identify theamendmentsmade,irrespective of whether they coricern
`amendments by addition, replacementor deletion, and indicate the passages
`of the application.asfiled on which these amendments are. based(see
`Guidelines E-ll, 1). if the applicant considers it appropriate, theseindications
`could be submitted in handwritten form on a copy of the relevant parts of the
`application asfiled.
`
`4.4
`
`To meet the requirements of Rule 42(1)(b) EPC, the documents D1 and D2
`should beidentified in the description and the relevant background art
`disclosed therein should be briefly discussed.
`
`WILTINK, Jan Gerhard
`
`First Examiner
`
`
`EPO Form 2908 $4.97 TRI
`
`Page 7 of 7
`
`Page 7 of 7
`
`