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 .
Examiner Note
Examiner notes that the claim amendments provided 9/17/2025 do not appear to follow sequentially from the claims provided 4/2/2025.
For example, the claims provided 4/2/2025 recites “wherein the communication application is an application distinct from the operating system.” However, the claims provided 9/17/2025 recite “wherein the communication application is an application running on the client device and is distinct from the operating system,” which incorrectly suggests that “an application” has been added via a claim amendment when it was present in the prior claims.
Examiner will consider the claims as provided, but recommends Applicant review the claim amendments in order to ensure that the correct claims have been provided.
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument, specifically Jakes et al. (US 20110085679 A1).
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.
2. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 20030177893 A1) in view of Gossweiler et al. (US 8749610 B1), Elliott et al. (US 7757182 B2) and Jakes et al. (US 20110085679 A1).
Claim 1 Takeuchi teaches a system comprising:
one or more processors coupled to a memory; (FIG. 1, ¶0012, CPU and memory)
an operating system (FIG. 1, Operating System 2, ¶0070) executing on the one or more processors of a client device, (FIG. 1, Personal Computer 3, ¶0070) the operating system comprising a voice mute coordinator (FIG. 1, Outgoing Audio Parameter Setting Section 8, ¶0070) and code to output a mute user interface, (FIG. 4, Audio Parameter Setting Window 400, Mute-on/off setting checkbox-on/off setting checkbox 402, ¶0078, outputting a mute user interface) wherein the operating system registers a network communication session managed by a communication application to the voice mute coordinator, (FIG. 1, ¶0073 and ¶0076, wherein the operating system installs and registers the application software to the output audio parameter setting section) wherein the communication application is an application running on the client device (FIG. 1, ¶0070, wherein the application software is running on Personal Computer 3) and is distinct from the operating system; (FIG. 1, ¶0070, wherein application software group 1 is distinct from operating system 2) wherein the voice mute coordinator:
monitors a mute state of the communication application based on state information provided to the voice mute coordinator by the communication application; FIG. 5, ¶0087-¶0093, monitoring the mute state of communication application based on state information provided by the communication application to the operating system; ¶0071-¶0072, wherein the state information comprises an audio level that indicates a mute state) (
displays a mute-state indication for the communication application on the mute user interface, wherein the mute user interface is an element of the operating system; (FIG. 4, ¶0078, displaying a mute-state indication for the software application on the mute user interface, wherein the mute user interface is an element of the operation system)
receives a mute request through the mute user interface; (FIG. 4, ¶0078, receiving a mute request through the mute user interface)
receives a hover interaction with the mute user interface; (FIG. 4, ¶0078, Examiner notes that a “hover” interaction is taught via the generic functions of the user interface in Takeuchi, i.e. hovering UI elements is an inherent element of interacting with the UI) and
outputs a notice indicating the mute state of the communication application. (FIG. 4, ¶0078, displaying a mute-state indication for the software application, wherein the mute-state indication comprises a notice indicating the mute-state indication)
However, Takeuchi does not explicitly teach wherein the mute user interface is an element of an operating system taskbar; and
wherein the voice mute coordinator:
communicates a mute state change request to the communication application in response to the mute request through the mute user interface;
wherein the mute state change request is an internal client device communication and instructs the communication application to turn off an outgoing audio channel from the communication application to a communication session.
From a related technology, Gossweiler teaches communicates a mute state change request to the communication application in response to the mute request through a mute user interface. (FIG. 3, step 306; FIG. 3, step 302, Col. 24, Lines 26-40, communicating a mute change request to a communication application node received through an interface)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Takeuchi to incorporate the techniques used in Gossweiler, wherein mute requests are transmitted from controller or mediator elements to the respective element being requested in order to more effectively utilize network resources to gather inputs across a network and directed them appropriately.
However, Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler does not explicitly teach wherein the mute user interface is an element of an operating system taskbar;
wherein the mute state change request is an internal client device communication and instructs the communication application to turn off an outgoing audio channel from the communication application to a communication session.
From a related technology, Elliot teaches wherein a mute user interface is an element of an operating system taskbar. (FIG. 4, Taskbar User Interface 208, Col. 5, Lines 29-48, wherein a user interface that has mute control is an element of the OS taskbar)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler to incorporate the OS taskbar implementation taught in Elliot in order to more effectively utilize network resources.
However, Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler and Elliot does not explicitly teach a mute state change request is an internal client device communication and instructs the communication application to turn off an outgoing audio channel from the communication application to a communication session.
From a related technology, Jakes teaches a mute state change request that is an internal client device communication (FIG. 3, ¶0027, wherein the smart mute request comprise an internal client device communication) and instructs a communication application to turn off an outgoing audio channel from the communication application to a communication session. (¶0027, wherein the request instructions specific communication applications to be muted, i.e. turn off outgoing audio channels to communication sessions)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler and Elliot in order to incorporate the techniques used in Jakes to manage audio via mute requests.
Claim 2 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the mute user interface is an element of an operating system, (Takeuchi, FIG. 4, Audio Parameter Setting Window 400, ¶0078, the user interface being an element of the operating system) a system tray, a dock, or an icon bar.
Claim 3 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the mute-state indication comprises a symbol or icon that changes appearance based in response to a change in the mute state. (Takeuchi, FIG. 4, Audio Parameter Setting Window 400, ¶0078, wherein the audio level changes based on mute state)
Claim 4 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 3, wherein the symbol or icon displayed by the mute user interface comprises an interactive mute control. (Takeuchi, FIG. 4, Audio Parameter Setting Window 400, ¶0078, comprising an interactive mute control)
Claim 7 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the communication application and a second communication application are running on the system (Takeuchi, FIG. 1, ¶0074, a first application software and a second application software) and wherein the voice mute coordinator forwards mute state change requests to the communication application or the second communication application based on the mute state of the communication application and the mute state the second communication application. (Gossweiler, Col. 24, Lines 26-40, wherein a mediating node forwards mute requests to their respective application node)
Claim 8 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the communication application and a second communication application are running on the system (Takeuchi, FIG. 1, ¶0074, a first application software and a second application software) and wherein the mute-state indication displays the mute state for the communication application and a second mute state for the second communication application. (Takeuchi, FIG. 5, ¶0090, wherein a first application software and a second application software have their mute state displaced by the interface)
Claim 9 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 1, and further teaches wherein the communication application and a second communication application are running on a system (Takeuchi, FIG. 1, ¶0074, a first application software and a second application software) and wherein a voice mute coordinator issues a hold command to mute the outgoing audio channel of the communication application when the second communication application becomes an active application. (Examiner notes that the condition “when the second application becomes an active application” places a contingency on the limitation, and as the claim does not indicate that necessity of this contingency, i.e. that the second application becomes an active application, the limitation has no patentable weight)
Claim 10 is taught by Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes as described for Claim 1.
Claim 11 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 10, and further teaches wherein the operating system comprises communication application programming interface (API) functions (Gossweiler, Col. 6, Lines 18-21, API functions) that the first communication application uses to facilitate establishing a network communication audio output channel over a network. (Examiner notes that “that the first communication application uses to facilitate establishing…” comprises an intended use statement, wherein the facilitation by the first communication application is not an element of the recited claims, but instead merely an intended use, and does not have patentable weight)
Claim 12 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes Claim 10, and further teaches wherein the first communication application subscribes to the operating system level mute services via a voice mute coordinator (VMC), (Takeuchi, FIG. 1, ¶0073 and ¶0076, wherein the operating system subscribes the application software to the output audio parameter setting section) wherein the VMC comprises an application programming interface (API) service application in the operating system. (Gossweiler, Col. 6, Lines 18-21, API functions)
Claim 13 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 10, and further teaches further comprising updating an appearance of a symbol displayed by the mute user interface based on changes to the mute state of the first communication application. (Takeuchi, FIG. 5, ¶0090, wherein a first application software and a second application software have their mute state displaced by the interface)
Claim 14 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 10, and further teaches wherein a mute-state indication of the mute user interface comprises a symbol or icon that changes appearance when the mute state changes. (Takeuchi, FIG. 5, ¶0090, wherein a first application software and a second application software have their mute state displaced by the interface)
Claim 15 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 10, and further teaches wherein the first communication application transmits voice information captured from an audio input over the outgoing audio channel. (Takeuchi, FIG. 5, ¶0090, wherein a first application software transits the audio information over the outgoing channel)
Claim 16 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 10, and further teaches registering activation of a second network communication call by a second communication application with the operating system; (Takeuchi, FIG. 1, ¶0073 and ¶0076, wherein the operating system installs and registers the second application software to the output audio parameter setting section) subscribing the second communication application to the operating system level mute services; (Takeuchi, FIG. 1, ¶0073 and ¶0076, wherein the operating system subscribes the second application software to the output audio parameter)
with the operating system level mute services, monitoring the mute state of the second communication application based on one or more messages from the second communication application; (Takeuchi, FIG. 5, ¶0087-¶0093, monitoring the mute state of communication application based on state information provided by the communication application to the operating system; ¶0071-¶0072, wherein the state information comprises an audio level that indicates a mute state) and wherein the mute state indication displayed on the mute user interface is based on the mute state of the first communication application and the mute state of the second communication application. (Takeuchi, FIG. 5, ¶0090, wherein a first application software and a second application software have their mute state displaced by the interface)
Claim 18 is taught by Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes as described for Claim 1.
Claim 19 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 18, and further teaches wherein a mute state indication of the mute user interface comprises a symbol or icon that changes appearance when the mute state changes. (Takeuchi, FIG. 5, ¶0090, wherein a first application software and a second application software have their mute state displaced by the interface)
3. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 20030177893 A1) in view of Gossweiler et al. (US 8749610 B1), Elliott et al. (US 7757182 B2), and Jakes et al. (US 20090216835 A1) and in further view of Yerrace et al. (US 20140052438 A1)
Claim 5 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the communication application comprises a web application executing within a browser or an applet executing within a runtime environment.
From a related technology, Yerrance teaches wherein the communication application comprises a web application executing within a browser (Yerrance, ¶0002, web browser software application) or an applet executing within a runtime environment.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler and Elliot to incorporate web applications as taught in Yerrace in order to more effectively adapt to various well-known application types and situations that may improve operation and efficiency.
3. Claims 6, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 20030177893 A1) in view of Gossweiler et al. (US 8749610 B1), Elliott et al. (US 7757182 B2) and Jakes et al. (US 20090216835 A1). and in further view of Kato (US 20120026279 A1).
Claim 6 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the outgoing audio channel receives audio input from a microphone; and wherein the operating system displays active applications receiving input from the microphone, and a mute status of each of the active applications.
From a related technology, Kato teaches wherein the outgoing audio channel receives audio input from a microphone; (Kato, FIG. 2, ¶0087, microphone 114) and
wherein the operating system displays active applications receiving input from the microphone, and a mute status of each of the active applications. (Kato, FIG. 33, ¶0335, displaying the active terminals, i.e. applications, receiving inputs from the microphone and their respective mute states)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler and Elliot to incorporate the well-known techniques and technology taught in Kato, such as microphone technology and related techniques for displaying respective statuses, in order to more effectively utilize network resources given well-known interface devices.
Claim 17 Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, and Jakes teaches Claim 16, but does not explicitly teaches wherein the mute user interface identifies the first communication application and the second communication application.
From a related technology, Kato teaches wherein the mute user interface identifies the first communication application and the second communication application. (Kato, FIG. 33, ¶0335, wherein the user interface separately identifies each microphone application)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler and Elliot to incorporate the well-known techniques and technology taught in Kato to identify respective applications in order to improve user accessibility and efficiency.
Claim 20 is taught by Claim 6 as described by Takeuchi in view of Gossweiler, Elliot, Jakes and Kato.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER PALACA CADORNA whose telephone number is (571)270-0584. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00.
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, Glenton Burgess can be reached at (571) 272-3949. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P CADORNA/Examiner, Art Unit 2444
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444