Obviousness

Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, an invention is considered obvious if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSA) at the time the invention was made. The analysis involves determining the scope and content of the prior art, identifying differences between the claimed invention and the prior art, and assessing the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. A motivation to combine prior art references is generally required to establish obviousness, which can come from the nature of the problem, the prior art itself, or the knowledge of a skilled artisan. Predictable results from combining known elements can also be enough to prove obviousness.

The priority date for US Patent 7209876 is November 13, 2001. Therefore, prior art references published or made publicly available before this date are relevant for an obviousness analysis.

Prior Art References Cited in US7209876:

The "Patent Citations" section of US7209876 lists numerous prior art references, including:

• US4688195A (1987-08-18) - Natural-language interface generating system
• US5386556A (1995-01-31) - Natural language analyzing apparatus and method
• US5309359A (1994-05-03) - Method and apparatus for generating and utilizing annotations to facilitate computer text retrieval
• US5404295A (1995-04-04) - Method and apparatus for utilizing annotations to facilitate computer retrieval of database material
• US5768603A (1998-06-16) - Method and system for natural language translation
• US6126306A (2000-10-03) - Natural language processing method for converting a first natural language into a second natural language using data structures
• US5418948A (1995-05-23) - Concept matching of natural language queries with a database of document concepts
• US5734889A (1998-03-31) - Method and apparatus for retrieving data and inputting retrieved data to spreadsheet including descriptive sentence input means and natural language interface means
• US5499335A (1996-03-12) - Method and system for providing standard resources in different natural languages
• US5592668A (1997-01-07) - Method and apparatus for specifying a query to an information system using natural language-like constructs
• US6052656A (2000-04-18) - Natural language processing system and method for processing input information by predicting kind thereof
• US6088692A (2000-07-11) - Natural language method and system for searching for and ranking relevant documents from a computer database
• US6282538B1 (2001-08-28) - Method and apparatus for generating query responses in a computer-based document retrieval system
• US5963940A (1999-10-05) - Natural language information retrieval system and method
• US6026388A (2000-02-15) - User interface and other enhancements for natural language information retrieval system and method
• US5873076A (1999-02-16) - Architecture for processing search queries, retrieving documents identified thereby, and method for using same
• US6418432B1 (2002-07-09) - System and method for finding information in a distributed information system using query learning and meta search (Note: Publication date is after priority date, but application date may be relevant for 102(e) if it has an earlier filing date)
• US6314411B1 (2001-11-06) - Artificially intelligent natural language computational interface system for interfacing a human to a data processor having human-like responses
• US5884302A (1999-03-16) - System and method to answer a question
• US6078914A (2000-06-20) - Natural language meta-search system and method
• US6192338B1 (2001-02-20) - Natural language knowledge servers as network resources
• US6081774A (2000-06-27) - Natural language information retrieval system and method
• US5991713A (1999-11-23) - Efficient method for compressing, storing, searching and transmitting natural language text
• US6327589B1 (2001-12-04) - Method for searching a file having a format unsupported by a search engine
• US6950793B2 (2005-09-27) - System and method for deriving natural language representation of formal belief structures (Note: Publication date is after priority date)

Obviousness Analysis (Illustrative Combinations):

Given the numerous prior art references in the field of natural language processing and information retrieval, a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSA) in November 2001 would likely have been familiar with techniques for parsing natural language, conducting keyword searches, and presenting information. The core inventive concept of US7209876 revolves around transforming a natural language question into an expected answer form, using this form for a meta-search, and presenting direct answers.

Here are some illustrative combinations of prior art that could render certain claims of US7209876 obvious:

Combination 1: US5884302A (Ho) in view of US5963940A (Syracuse University) and general knowledge in the art.

• US5884302A (Ho): This patent describes a system and method to answer a question [cited in US7209876B2]. While the details of Ho's approach would need to be thoroughly examined, it provides a foundational understanding of systems designed to directly answer questions.

• US5963940A (Syracuse University): This patent discloses a natural language information retrieval system and method [cited in US7209876B2]. It likely teaches techniques for processing natural language queries and retrieving relevant information.

• Motivation to Combine: A POSA in 2001, seeking to improve direct question answering, would be motivated to combine a question-answering system like Ho's with natural language information retrieval techniques like those in Syracuse University. The goal would be to enhance the ability of Ho's system to understand and process natural language input more effectively, leading to more accurate and direct answers. If Ho's system did not explicitly detail converting a natural language question into an "expected answer form," a POSA would find it obvious to apply natural language parsing techniques (as suggested by Syracuse University) to derive structural expectations for answers. For example, if Ho processed a question to extract keywords, a POSA would readily understand that structuring these keywords into an "expected answer form" (e.g., "The capital of X is Y") would significantly improve the precision of finding direct answers, rather than just documents containing keywords.

Combination 2: US6078914A (Open Text Corporation) in view of US6282538B1 (Sun Microsystems, Inc.)

• US6078914A (Open Text Corporation): This patent describes a natural language meta-search system and method [cited in US7209876B2]. This directly addresses the concept of performing meta-searches based on natural language.

• US6282538B1 (Sun Microsystems, Inc.): This patent describes a method and apparatus for generating query responses in a computer-based document retrieval system [cited in US7209876B2]. This reference would likely teach mechanisms for formulating queries and processing results to provide responses.

• Motivation to Combine: A POSA would be motivated to combine Open Text Corporation's meta-search capabilities with Sun Microsystems' query response generation. The objective would be to leverage the broad searching power of a meta-search engine (as in Open Text) to gather a wider initial dataset, and then apply more refined query response generation techniques (as in Sun Microsystems) to extract and format direct answers. Specifically, if Open Text provided a raw list of search results, a POSA would naturally look to a system like Sun Microsystems, which focuses on generating responses from documents, to further process those results into direct answers. The "expected answer form" of US7209876 could be seen as an obvious way to bridge the gap between a broad meta-search and a targeted answer extraction.

Combination 3: US5592668A (Asymetrix Corporation) in view of US6088692A (University Of Central Florida) and US6026388A (Textwise, Llc)

• US5592668A (Asymetrix Corporation): This patent describes a method and apparatus for specifying a query to an information system using natural language-like constructs [cited in US7209876B2]. This suggests the use of user-friendly, structured queries.

• US6088692A (University Of Central Florida): This patent discloses a natural language method and system for searching for and ranking relevant documents from a computer database [cited in US7209876B2]. This reference would teach methods for searching and ranking.

• US6026388A (Textwise, Llc): This patent describes user interface and other enhancements for natural language information retrieval system and method [cited in US7209876B2]. This points to the idea of improving the user experience and presentation of results.

• Motivation to Combine: A POSA would be motivated to combine these references to create a more user-friendly and effective natural language question-answering system. Asymetrix Corporation's "natural language-like constructs" could be easily adapted or interpreted as an "expected answer form." The University of Central Florida's work on searching and ranking would provide the backend for finding and prioritizing information. Textwise, Llc's focus on user interface enhancements would naturally lead a POSA to format the retrieved answers directly and clearly for the user, perhaps highlighting the answer data, similar to what is claimed in US7209876. The motivation is to create a seamless user experience, from natural language input to a direct, formatted answer, which would involve integrating the "natural language-like constructs" with search, ranking, and presentation improvements.

General Motivation to Combine:

The field of natural language processing and information retrieval was well-established by 2001. A POSA would be motivated to combine existing techniques to overcome known limitations of traditional keyword-based search engines, such as the difficulty in formulating effective queries and the irrelevance of many search results. The stated problem in US7209876 itself—that prior art keyword searches "rarely mirrors a user's natural language" and often yield "irrelevant" results—highlights a widely recognized need in the art. The motivation to provide "direct answers" instead of mere links was a clear objective in the field. The concept of using grammatical or syntactic patterns to extract specific answers from text, rather than just documents, would be an obvious next step for a POSA working to improve the precision and directness of search results. The use of "variable expressions" in an "expected answer form" is a predictable application of pattern-matching techniques to achieve this goal, as pattern matching in text was a known technique at the time.

Therefore, many claims of US7209876, particularly those related to transforming natural language questions into expected answer forms, conducting searches based on these forms, and providing direct answers, could be considered obvious in light of the extensive prior art in natural language processing and information retrieval available before November 2001.