Detailed Action
This action is in response to application filed on 10/14/2022
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 10/14/2022 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawing figures 3-4 includes text that is blurry and illegible. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 1 is 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. For instance,
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the customizable portions" (line 7), and “the generated presentation” (line 11). There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Appropriate amendments/remarks required.
At least to due dependency, claims 2-7 are rejected under the same rational as set forth above for claim 1.
Additionally:
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the presenter" (line 1), “the customized contents” (line 2). There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "role" (line 2). It is not clear if this instance of “role” is the same or different element “role” as recited in the parent claim 1.
Claim 8 includes similar limitation as noted for above claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the rational as set forth for claim 1.
At least to due dependency, claims 9-14 are rejected under the same rational as set forth above for claim 8.
Additionally:
Claims 10 and 14 recites similar limitation as noted for above claims 3 and 7 and are therefore rejected under the rational as set forth for claims 3 and 7
Claim 15 includes similar limitation as noted for above claims 1 and 7 and is therefore rejected under the rational as set forth for claims 1, and 7.
At least to due dependency, claims 16-20 are rejected under the same rational as set forth above for claim 15.
Additionally:
Claim 17 recites similar limitation as noted above for claim 3 and is therefore rejected under the rational as set forth for claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Representative claim 1 is directed to A method, comprising:
receiving at a content generation service, a request to generate a presentation for an online meeting having attendees comprising different roles;
receiving at the content generation service, content for a generic presentation;
defining one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation as customizable;
assigning labels to each of the customizable portions of the generic presentation, wherein each label is associated with a role of an attendee in the online meeting;
receiving customized content for each customizable portion, wherein the customized content is associated with the label of the customizable portion; and
storing the generated presentation and each associated customized content separately in content object storage.
Per prong 1, Step 2A, the above emphasized element/concepts are not meaningfully different than those concepts found by the courts to be abstract, namely,
Mental Processes including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) and/or humans using pen and paper (see, October 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance Update, 84 Fed. Reg. 55,942, hereinafter “PEG”).
Certain Methods Of Organizing Human Activity including fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions)
For instance, humans can mentally and/or via aid of pen/paper perform certain methods of human activities including defining/designate one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation as customizable; assigning labels to each of the customizable portions of the generic presentation, wherein each label is associated with a role of an attendee in the… meeting; recording/saving the generated presentation and each associated customized content separately in content repository/book/binder.
.
Per prong 2, Step 2A, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “receiving at a content generation service, a request to generate a presentation for an online meeting having attendees comprising different roles; receiving at the content generation service, content for a generic presentation; the online meeting; receiving customized content for each customizable portion, wherein the customized content is associated with the label of the customizable portion; and storing the generated presentation and each associated customized content separately in content object storage”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea; and are generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results.
Per Step 2B, the additional non-emphasized elements as noted above; namely; “receiving at a content generation service, a request to generate a presentation for an online meeting having attendees comprising different roles; receiving at the content generation service, content for a generic presentation; the online meeting; receiving customized content for each customizable portion, wherein the customized content is associated with the label of the customizable portion; and storing the generated presentation and each associated customized content separately in content object storage”; are mere data gathering/sending steps/insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; are merely adding words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception/mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea and are generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use - see MPEP 2106.05(d, f, g, h). Additionally, the recited claim limitations do not improve the functionality of the electronic device or achieve improved technical results. The above limitations singularly or in combination do not result in the claim as a whole amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Accordingly, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Dependent claims 2-7 when considered individually or in combination per steps as noted above are rejected under the same rational as set forth above for claim 1. In particular, claims 2-7 describe mental steps with aid of paper/pen of customized content selection based on role of attendee, as well as additional elements of presenting/displaying/toggling between generated presentation and customized content, customized content being overlay to generated presentation, displaying content based user role, registering meeting, storing attendee information/role, a link between storage object, and presentation/customized content, and content object storage, which does not impose meaningful limitation to abstract idea (Per prong 2, Step 2A, and Step 2B) and same analysis and conclusion apply as noted for claim 1.
Claims 8-20 are medium and system claims corresponding to method claims 1-7 and are of substantially same scope.
Accordingly, claims 8-20 are rejected under the same rational as set forth for claims 1-7.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 1-6, and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Negi et al. (US 20210182430 A1, referred hereinafter as D1) in view of Schultz et al. (US 20140245132 A1, referred hereinafter as D2).
As per claim 1, D1 discloses,
A method, comprising, (D1, title, abstract).
receiving at a content generation service, a request to generate a presentation for an online meeting having attendees comprising different roles, (D1, figure 5, 0019-0020, 0074, 0088-0089 discloses receiving at a content generation service/system of D1, a request to generate/initiate a presentation for an online meeting/co-browsing having attendees comprising different roles (e.g. external/internal users, customers/representative etc.).).
receiving at the content generation service, content for a generic presentation, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0089 discloses at the system of D1/GUI, user request to upload/share a document (e.g. generic presentation)).
defining one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation as customizable, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag based on customized permissions)).
assigning labels to each of the customizable portions of the generic presentation, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not).
wherein each label is associated with a role of an attendee in the online meeting, (D1, figure 3B-4, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not, as well as setting permission levels (e.g. roles) of users to be able to view or not sensitive content, and such D1 clearly discloses wherein each label (e.g. marking/tagging indicating sensitivity) is associated with a role (e.g. permission level) of an attendee in the online meeting).
receiving customized content for each customizable portion, (D1, 0029, 0097 discloses receiving/overlaying mask over tagged/marked portion, where overly mask is a svg tags/file (e.g. scalable vector graphic), where user is able to move/resize the svgs/masks).
wherein the customized content is associated with the label of the customizable portion, (D1, figure 3B-4, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not, and overlaying/associating svg tag/file (e.g. scalable vector graphic/mask) with marked/tagged/customizable portion.).
and storing the generated presentation and each associated customized content… in content object storage, (D1, figure 3B-4, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not, and overlaying/associating svg tag/file (e.g. scalable vector graphic/mask) with marked/tagged/customizable portion, and displaying document with or without mask in association with marked/tag portions which at the very least requires storing the generated presentation and each associated customized content in the working memory (RAM) (e.g. content object storage) of the computing device.).
D1 fails to expressly disclose – [storing presentation and customized content] separately in content object storage.
D2 (0081) discloses known methods/systems of storing content separately from document/templates
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of storing document and content separately as disclosed by D2
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the customized content is selected and [moved/resized by user, and subsequently displayed] … based on the role of the attendee, (D1, figure 3-5, 0032, 0081 user being able to select and move/resize masks, black boxes (e.g. customized content), and having the masks/black boxes displayed based on the role/permission level of attendee.).
D1 fails to expressly disclose – [content selected] from the content object storage.
D2 (0065, 0081) discloses known methods/systems of storing content separately from document/templates in database, and subsequently selecting the content from the content object storage and merging the content template/document for display. Additionally, the examiner notes/takes official notice that selecting content from based on user role/profile was notoriously well known before effecting filing the invention.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of selecting content from storage and merging the content with document/template for display as disclosed by D2.
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the presenter toggles between the generated presentation and any of the customized contents on a presenter’s display during the online meeting, (D1, 0032 discloses toggle button allowing user/presenters or groups of users to switch between censored and uncensored version of document/presentation which clearly reads on presenter toggles between the generated presentation and any of the customized contents (e.g. censored/masked/blocked) on a presenter’s display during the online meeting.).
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the customized content is an overlay to the generated presentation, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag based on customized permissions).).
and wherein a combination of the customized content and the generated presentation is displayed to each attendee based on attendee role during the online meeting, (D1, figure 3B-5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag and displaying a combination of the customized content and the generated presentation to each attendee based on attendee role (e.g. permission level) during the online meeting).).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the attendee toggles between the generated presentation and the customized content during the online meeting, (D1, 0032 discloses toggle/GUI button allowing groups of users to switch between censored and uncensored version of document/presentation which clearly reads on the attendee toggles between the generated presentation (E.g. uncensored content) and the customized content (e.g. censored/masked content) during the online meeting.).
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein upon registering for the online meeting, an audience information service stores attendee information, including attendee role, (D1, figure 4-5, 0085, 0088-0089 discloses initiating/registering online co-browsing meeting/session, as setting/recording/storing attendee roles/permission levels.).
As per claims 8-13:
Claims 8-13 are medium claims correspond to methods claims 1-6 and are of substantially same scope.
Accordingly, claims 1-6 are rejected under the same rational as set forth for claims 1-6.
Claim 7, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Negi et al. (US 20210182430 A1, referred hereinafter as D1) in view of Schultz et al. (US 20140245132 A1, referred hereinafter as D2) in view of Kolb et al. (US 20180032930 A1, referred hereinafter as D3).
As per claims 7 and 14, the rejection of claims 1 and 8 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein [user/AI input] associates the generated presentation with each customized content based on role, (D1, figure 3B-5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag and displaying a combination of the customized content and the generated presentation to each attendee based on attendee role (e.g. permission level) during the online meeting) which reads on user/AI input associates the generated presentation/document with each customized content/mask based on role/permission levels/content sensitivity.).
D1/D2 discloses associating/linking content with document/template/presentation; however, D1 fails to expressly disclose - a link in the content object storage.
However, D3 (0049) discloses known methods/systems of storing a link in the content object storage (e.g. database) to link different objects as having a relationship.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of storing links indicating relationships between different objects/content as disclosed by D3 (0049).
As per claim 15, D1 discloses,
a computer system, comprising, one or more processors, a memory coupled to at least one of the processors; a set of computing program instructions stored in the memory and executed by the at least one of the processors in order to perform actions of (D1, title, abstract, figure 1 and accompanying text).
receiving at a content generation service, a request to generate a presentation for an online meeting having attendees comprising different roles, (D1, figure 5, 0019-0020, 0074, 0088-0089 discloses receiving at a content generation service/system of D1, a request to generate/initiate a presentation for an online meeting/co-browsing having attendees comprising different roles (e.g. external/internal users, customers/representative etc.).).
receiving at the content generation service, content for a generic presentation, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0089 discloses at the system of D1/GUI, user request to upload/share a document (e.g. generic presentation)).
defining one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation as customizable, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag based on customized permissions)).
assigning labels to each of the customizable portions of the generic presentation, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not).
wherein each label is associated with a role of an attendee in the online meeting, (D1, figure 3B-4, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not, as well as setting permission levels (e.g. roles) of users to be able to view or not sensitive content, and such D1 clearly discloses wherein each label (e.g. marking indicating sensitivity) is associated with a role (e.g. permission level) of an attendee in the online meeting).
receiving customized content for each customizable portion, (D1, 0029, 0097 discloses receiving/overlaying mask over tagged/marked portion, where overly mask is a svg tags/file (e.g. scalable vector graphic), where user is able to move/resize the svgs/masks).
wherein the customized content is associated with the label of the customizable portion, (D1, figure 3B-4, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not, and overlaying/associating svg tag/file (e.g. scalable vector graphic/mask) with marked/tagged/customizable portion.).
and storing the generated presentation and each associated customized content… in content object storage, (D1, figure 3B-4, 5 and accompanying text, 0029, 0085, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page/document as sensitive or not, and overlaying/associating svg tag/file (e.g. scalable vector graphic/mask) with marked/tagged/customizable portion, and displaying document with or without mask in association with marked/tag portions which at the very least requires storing the generated presentation and each associated customized content in the working memory (RAM) (e.g. content object storage) of the computing device.).
[user/AI] associates the generated presentation with each customized content based on role, (D1, figure 3B-5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag and displaying a combination of the customized content the generated presentation to each attendee based on attendee role (e.g. permission level) during the online meeting) which reads on user/AI input associates the generated presentation/document with each customized content/mask based on role/permission levels/content sensitivity.).
D1 fails to expressly disclose – [storing presentation and customized content] separately in content object storage.
D2 (0081) discloses known methods/systems of storing content separately from document/templates
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of storing document and content separately as disclosed by D2.
D1/D2 discloses associating/linking content with document/template/presentation; however, D1 fails to expressly disclose - a link in the content object storage.
However, D3 (0049) discloses known methods/systems of storing a link in the content object storage (e.g. database) to indicate a relationship between objects.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings of D2 as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of storing links indicating relationships between different objects/content as disclosed by D3 (0049).
As per claim 16, the rejection of claim 15 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the customized content is selected and [moved/resized by user, and subsequently displayed] … based on the role of the attendee, (D1, figure 3-5, 0032, 0081 user being able to select and move/resize masks, black boxes (e.g. customized content), and having the masks/black boxes displayed based on the role/permission level of attendee.).
D1 fails to expressly disclose – [content selected] from the content object storage.
D2 (0065, 0081) discloses known methods/systems of storing content separately from document/templates in database, and subsequently selecting the content from the content object storage and merging the content template/document for display. Additionally, the examiner notes/takes official notice that selecting content from based on user role/profile was notoriously well known before effecting filing the invention.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, as disclosed in D1, to include the teachings as noted above. This would have been obvious with predicable results of selecting content from storage and merging the content with document/template for display as disclosed by D2.
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 15 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the presenter toggles between the generated presentation and any of the customized contents on a presenter’s display during the online meeting, (D1, 0032 discloses toggle button allowing user/presenters or groups of users to switch between censored and uncensored version of document/presentation which clearly reads on presenter toggles between the generated presentation and any of the customized contents (e.g. censored/masked/blocked) on a presenter’s display during the online meeting.).
As per claim 18, the rejection of claim 15 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the customized content is an overlay to the generated presentation, (D1, figure 3B-3C, 5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag based on customized permissions).).
and wherein a combination of the customized content and the generated presentation is displayed to each attendee based on attendee role during the online meeting, (D1, figure 3B-5 and accompanying text, 0018, 0029, 0089-0090 discloses a user and/or AI system defining/tagging/marking one or more portion of a page or an entire page of the generic presentation (e.g. uploaded document) as customizable (e.g. defining/tagging portions as sensitive and having the portions blocked/masked/unmasked/overlayed with svg file/div tag and displaying a combination of the customized content and the generated presentation to each attendee based on attendee role (e.g. permission level) during the online meeting).).
As per claim 19, the rejection of claim 15 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein the attendee toggles between the generated presentation and the customized content during the online meeting, (D1, 0032 discloses toggle/GUI button allowing groups of users to switch between censored and uncensored version of document/presentation which clearly reads on the attendee toggles between the generated presentation (E.g. uncensored content) and the customized content (e.g. censored/masked content) during the online meeting.).
As per claim 20, the rejection of claim 15 further incorporated, D1 discloses,
wherein upon registering for the online meeting, an audience information service stores attendee information, including attendee role, (D1, figure 4-5, 0085, 0088-0089 discloses initiating/registering online co-browsing meeting/session, as setting/recording/storing attendee roles/permission levels.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Sections Of A Presentation Having User-Definable Properties
DOCUMENT ID
US 20120131464 A1
DATE PUBLISHED
2012-05-24
Abstract
In general, this disclosure describes techniques that employ user-defined values of properties of sections of an electronic presentation. As described herein, a user may configure a presentation to include a plurality of sections. Each of the sections includes zero or more slides of the electronic slide presentation. In addition to the slides associated with each section, each of the sections is associated with one or more properties having values that can be defined by an author of the presentation. Because the values of the properties of the sections are user-definable, these properties may, in some implementations of these techniques, enable the author of the presentation to use the sections in ways not possible in presentation applications that merely use sections as a means of grouping thumbnail images of slides for navigation among slides in an authoring interface.
Metadata Role-Based View Generation In Multimedia Editing Systems And Methods Therefor
DOCUMENT ID
US 20110246555 A1
DATE PUBLISHED
2011-10-06
Abstract
Systems and methods for automatic transformation the overall metadata associated with the multimedia content (MMC) at the global media hub (GMH) into unique role-and-client-based views via the network for review through the media access node (MAN) associated with the client, wherein those views of the metadata, general or temporal or subset, are unique and specific to each user in the context of that user's role within the client.
Customizing The Presentation Of Information To Suit A User's Personality Type
DOCUMENT ID
US 20030036899 A1
DATE PUBLISHED
2003-02-20
Abstract
A personality type indicator is determined for a user who interacts with a server. The determination is made by analyzing information gathered by observing the user's interactions with the server rather than by asking the user to answer explicit questions. The content or the style of an information presentation is customized according to the user's personality type indicator. In one embodiment of the invention, the personality type indicator is a Myers Briggs Type Indicator.
See form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSTAFA A AMIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3181. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Young, can be reached on 571-270-3180. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MUSTAFA A AMIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2194