Deep hierarchical fusion for machine intelligence applications

All Office Actions (4)

Notice of AllowanceLatest

Aug 23, 2023

Notice of Allowance — all claims 1-12 and 16 allowed

The applicant must pay the issue fee within three months of the Notice of Allowance mailing date to complete the patent grant process. The USPTO will mail an issue fee due notice with the exact amount and deadline. Once paid, the patent typically issues 4-12 weeks later. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Allowable subject matter (2)

AlSMclaims 1-12, 16
AlSMclaims 2-11— they further limit allowable parent claim 1.

Non-Final Office Action after RCE

Mar 7, 2023 · §103

Non-Final Office Action after RCE — claims 1-12 and 16 rejected under §103

The applicant has three months from March 7, 2023 to respond, extendable to six months with fees. An attorney typically argues that the references don't teach the claimed combination, amends the claims to distinguish them from the prior art, or requests an examiner interview to narrow the issues. Note: the prosecution history shows a Notice of Allowance issued five months after this action, so this rejection was ultimately overcome. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (1)

§ 103Obviousnessclaims 1-12, 16

Claims 1-12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omote et al. (2019/0341025) in view of Gu et al. (“Multimodal affective analysis using hierarchical attention strategy with word-level alignment.” Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 2225–2235 Melbourne, Australia, July 15 - 20, 2018).

Examiner theory

Consider claim 1, Omote discloses a method for processing multi-modal input (using a neural network with multimodal inputs, [0002]) comprising: receiving a plurality of signal inputs, each signal input having a corresponding input mode (audio, video, text, and other, Fig. 7 elements 711, [0027]); processing each signal input in a series of mode-specific processing stages, each successive mode-specific processing stage being associated with a successively longer scale of analysis of the signal input of the corresponding input mode (Fig 1B, features stage 104, Word level Fusion 104, Sentence Level Embedding 105,[0037]); and generating a fused output based on the output of a series of fused processing stages, each successive fused processing stage being associated with a successively longe

Final Office Action

Aug 5, 2022 · §102

Final Office Action — claims 1-10 and 12-15 rejected under §102 anticipation

A Final Office Action typically requires a response within three months (extendable to six with fees). Common attorney moves include amending the rejected claims to distinguish them from Omote, arguing that Omote does not disclose one or more claim elements, or filing a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) to reopen prosecution. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (1)

§ 102(a)(2)Anticipationclaims 1-10, 12-15

Claims 1-10 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Omote et al. (2019/0341025).

Examiner theory

Consider claim 1, Omote discloses a method for processing multi-modal input (using a neural network with multimodal inputs, [0002]) comprising: receiving a plurality of signal inputs, each signal input having a corresponding input mode (audio, video, text, and other, Fig. 7 elements 711, [0027]); processing each signal input in a series of mode-specific processing stages, each successive mode-specific stage being associated with a successively longer scale of analysis of the signal input (Fig 1B, features stage 104, Word level Fusion 104, Sentence Level Embedding 105,[0037]); and generating a fused output based on the output of a series of fused processing stages, each successive fused processing stage being associated with a successively longer scale of analysis of the signal input (outpu

Non-Final Office Action

Feb 14, 2022 · §102

Non-Final Office Action — claims 1-10 and 12 rejected under §102 anticipation

The applicant has three months from the mail date (extendable to six months with fees) to respond. A response typically involves arguing that Omote does not disclose one or more claim elements, amending the claims to distinguish them from Omote, or both. The examiner may also be open to an interview to discuss the rejection. An attorney typically handles this; if you'd like patentreply.ai to draft a response, click 'Get this drafted'.

Rejection groups (1)

§ 102(a)(2)Anticipationclaims 1-10, 12

Claims 1-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Omote et al. (2019/0341025).

Examiner theory

Consider claim 1, Omote discloses a method for processing multi-modal input (using a neural network with multimodal inputs, [0002]) comprising: receiving a plurality of signal inputs, each signal input having a corresponding input mode (audio, video, text, and other, Fig. 7 elements 711, [0027]); processing each signal input in a series of mode-specific processing stages, each successive mode-specific stage being associated with a successively longer scale of analysis of the signal input (Fig 1B, features stage 104, Word level Fusion 104, Sentence Level Embedding 105,[0037]); and generating a fused output based on the output of a series of fused processing stages, each successive fused processing stage being associated with a successively longer scale of analysis of the signal input (outpu

The latest Office Action

Compiled case file available

Draft a response to this Office Action

Claim status

Prosecution history

All Office Actions (4)

Notice of AllowanceLatest

Allowable subject matter (2)

Non-Final Office Action after RCE

Rejection groups (1)

Final Office Action

Rejection groups (1)

Non-Final Office Action

Rejection groups (1)