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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
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(s) 1-10, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench in view of Brannon (US 2022/0264180).
Regarding Claim 1,
Wrench (US 2016/0057386) teaches a system for compliant interaction between parties, comprising:
a computing device hosting a compliance and insight platform executing on the computing device, wherein the platform includes a first secure room hosted on the platform, wherein the first secure room includes a restricted environment that hosts interaction data between users based on one or more interactions rules of the secure room (Fig. 4 and associated text, teaches a secure room and a restricted environment including “business rules” “user profile rules” “content rules” “feedback rules”),
and wherein the first secure room is configured to receive first interaction data from a first user in the first secure room, provide at least a portion of the first interaction data to a second user in the first secure room (Paragraphs [0041-0044] teaches interacting with a first and second user),
and blind and restrict the first user and the second user from each other's identity (Paragraph [0198] teaches wherein user identities may be anonymous)
and the platform further includes a moderator of the first secure room, wherein the moderator is configured to moderate the interaction data in the first secure room (Paragraph [0014] teaches a mediator for the two person interaction)
Wrench does not explicitly teach perform a corrective action in response to detecting a violation of at least one of the interaction rules of the first secure room by the first user or the second user, wherein the corrective action is associated with said user.
Brannon teaches perform a corrective action in response to detecting a violation of at least one of the interaction rules of the first secure room by the first user or the second user, wherein the corrective action is associated with said user. (Paragraph [0044, 0066, 0128] teaches a video conference wherein words that are against the rules are removed or replaced)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench in view of the method of replacing or removing words in Brannon
The motivation is to redact sensitive or inappropriate information (Paragraph [0048])
Regarding Claim 2,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 1. Wrench teaches wherein the first interaction data comprises at least one of: text chat data; voice chat data; or video chat data (Paragraph [0032] teaches video conferencing)
Regarding Claim 3,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 1. Wrench teaches wherein the first secure room is further configured to: receive second interaction data from the second user, wherein the second interaction data includes a dataset; and provide at least a portion of the second interaction data to the first user (Paragraph [0046] teaches storing information and notes about the interaction)
Regarding Claim 4,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 3. Wrench teaches wherein the platform being configured to provide the at least a portion of the second interaction data to the first user includes the platform making the dataset available to download from the platform by the first user (Paragraph [0046][ teaches storing information and notes about the interaction)
Regarding Claim 5,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 1. Wrench teaches wherein :the platform is further configured to generate the first secure room based on a first compliance template received by the platform; and the first compliance template includes data indicating one or more entities, functionality of the first secure room, and data indicating one or more interaction rules (Paragraph [0041-0046] teaches “rules template” which define the rules in which the video conferencing system will be defined)
Regarding Claim 6,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 5. Wrench teaches wherein: the platform is further configured to generate a first technical setup based on the first compliance template; the first technical setup includes data indicating one or more roles for each of the first user and the second user based on the data indicating one or more entities from the compliance template (Paragraph [0195-0198] teaches multiple roles in the video conferencing system), and the one or more interaction rules of the secure room based on the data indicating the one or more interaction rules from the compliance template; and the platform generating the first secure room based on the first compliance template includes the platform generating the first secure room based on the first technical setup (Paragraph [0041-0046] teaches “rules template” which define the rules in which the video conferencing system will be defined)
.
Regarding Claim 7,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 6. Wrench teaches wherein: the platform is further configured to generate a second secure room based on a second technical setup, wherein the second secure room is hosted on the platform; and the data of the second technical setup indicating the roles and interaction rules of the second secure room are at least partially different than the data indicating the roles and interaction rules of the first secure room (Paragraph [0198] teaches different technical setups such as a legal role and a medical role)
Regarding Claim 8,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 1. Wrench teaches wherein the one or more roles include at least one of:a pharmaceutical company; or a healthcare provider (Paragraph [0181] “healthcare provider”)
Regarding Claim 9,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 1. Wrench teaches wherein the moderator comprises at least one of:a third user of the platform (Paragraph [0014] teaches mediator); or an artificial intelligence model.
Regarding Claim 15,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 1. Wrench teaches wherein the platform is further configured to provide the first interaction data to an auditor user of the platform, wherein the platform being configured to provide the first interaction data to the auditor user includes at least one of: the platform providing the auditor user access to a data storage of the platform, wherein the data storage stores the first interaction data (Paragraph [0143] teaches interactions are recorded and can be played back and reviewed for quality control or training); or the platform providing the auditor user access to a distributed ledger, wherein the distributed ledger includes a distributed ledger transaction that includes the first interaction data.
Regarding Claim 10,
Wrench and Brannon teaches the system of claim 1. Brannon teaches the first secure room comprises dictionary data, wherein the dictionary data includes a plurality of entries, and wherein each entry of the plurality of entries includes at least one of a word or a phrase; and in response to the first interaction data including an entry of the dictionary data, the platform is further configured to at least one of remove, from the first interaction data, the entry, or replace, in the first interaction data, the entry with one or more predetermined replacement words (Paragraph [0044, 0066] teaches a video conference wherein words are removed or replaced)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench in view of the method of replacing or removing words in Brannon
The motivation is to redact sensitive or inappropriate information (Paragraph [0048])
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench, and Brannon in view of Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936)
Regarding Claim 11,
Wrench teaches the system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein: the platform further comprises a distributed ledger node; and the platform is further configured to generate a first distributed ledger transaction, wherein the first distributed ledger transaction includes at least a portion of the first interaction data, and add the first distributed ledger transaction to a distributed ledger associated with the distributed ledger node.
Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936) teaches a distributed ledger node; and the platform is further configured to generate a first distributed ledger transaction, wherein the first distributed ledger transaction includes at least a portion of the first interaction data, and add the first distributed ledger transaction to a distributed ledger associated with the distributed ledger node (Paragraph [0014] teaches wherein distributed ledger is setup so a newly added block based on a transaction is validated)(Also see Fig. 3 and 4 and associated text, in particular 314)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the video conferencing method of Wrench to include a distributed ledger transaction method of Balasaygun
The motivation is to confirm validity of conference call recordings (Paragraph [0024] of Balasaygun)
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench in view of Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936)
Regarding Claim 20,
Wrench teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a first set of computer-executable instructions stored thereon, wherein in response to a computer processor executing the computer-executable instructions, the computer processor is configured to: receive, at a compliance and insight platform, a compliance template for a secure room, wherein the compliance template includes data indicating one or more entities, functionality of the secure room, and interaction rules of the secure room (Paragraph [0041-0046] teaches “rules template” which define the rules in which the video conferencing system will be defined);
generate, on the platform, a technical setup based on the compliance template, wherein the technical setup includes a second set of computer-executable instructions configured to enforce the interaction rules in the secure room; provide the secure room based on the interaction rules of the secure room (Paragraphs [0041-0044] teaches interacting with a first and second user); permit a first user and a second user of the platform to interact with one another in the secure room, wherein the first user and the second user interacting in the secure room includes the first user providing a dataset to the secure room, the platform making at least a portion of the dataset downloadable from the platform by the second user (Paragraph [0046] teaches storing information and notes about the interaction),
Wrench teaches provide a user interface for the secure room, wherein a functionality of the user interface is available or unavailable based on the technical setup (Paragraph [0143] teaches a technical set up that allows permissions to view data or not)(Paragraph [0049] teaches the system is composed of user interfaces for controlling the activities centered on video conferencing)
Wrench does not explicitly teach
the second user sending text-based communication data to the secure room, and the platform making at least a portion of the text-based communication data viewable by the first user in the user interface for the secure room by the first user; and record the text-based communication data on a distributed ledger.
Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936) teaches the second user sending text-based communication data to the secure room (Paragraph [0056] “text messaging”), making at least a portion of the interaction data viewable by the first user; and recording the interaction data on a distributed ledger. (Paragraph [0014] teaches wherein distributed ledger is setup so a newly added block based on a transaction is validated)(Also see Fig. 3 and 4 and associated text, in particular 314)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the video conferencing method of Wrench to include a distributed ledger transaction method of Balasaygun
The motivation is to confirm validity of conference call recordings (Paragraph [0024] of Balasaygun)
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench in view of Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936) in further view of Sambamurthy (US 2014/0283016)
Regarding Claim 16,
Wrench teaches a computer-implemented method for compliant interaction between parties in a secure room implemented on a compliance and insight platform, comprising:
receiving, at the platform, a compliance template, wherein the compliance template includes data indicating one or more entities, functionality of the secure room, and interaction rules of the secure room(Paragraph [0041-0046] teaches “rules template” which define the rules in which the video conferencing system will be defined); generating, on the platform, a technical setup based on the compliance template, wherein the technical setup includes computer-executable instructions configured to enforce the interaction rules in the secure room; providing the secure room based on the interactions rules of the secure room; permitting a first user and a second user of the platform to interact with one another in the secure room, wherein the first user and the second user interacting in the secure room includes the first user sending interaction data to the secure room (Paragraphs [0041-0044] teaches interacting with a first and second user)
Wrench does not explicitly teach the platform making at least a portion of the interaction data viewable by the second user; and recording the interaction data on a distributed ledger.
Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936) teaches making at least a portion of the interaction data viewable by the second user; and recording the interaction data on a distributed ledger. (Paragraph [0014] teaches wherein distributed ledger is setup so a newly added block based on a transaction is validated)(Also see Fig. 3 and 4 and associated text, in particular 314)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the video conferencing method of Wrench to include a distributed ledger transaction method of Balasaygun
The motivation is to confirm validity of conference call recordings (Paragraph [0024] of Balasaygun)
Wrench and Balasaygun does not explicitly teach applying a first tag to content associated with the secure room and a second tag to the interaction data from the secure room, wherein the first tag is associated with metadata related to the content and based on the technical setup; the interaction data including the second tag
Sambamurthy (US 2014/0283016) teaches applying a first tag to content associated with the secure room and a second tag to the interaction data from the secure room, wherein the first tag is associated with metadata related to the content and based on the technical setup; the interaction data including the second tag (Paragraph [0085] teaches “adding tags that relate to the content of the data”)(Paragraph [0009-0011, 0146] teaches adding tags for “interaction data”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench and Balasaygun to include a first and second tag for content and interaction data as taught by Sambamurthy and the results would be predictable (i.e. a first and second tag for content and interaction data would be added to the data from the secure room)
Regarding Claim 17,
Wrench, Balasaygun and Sambamurthy teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 16. Wrench teaches wherein the interaction data comprises at least one of: text chat data; voice chat data; or video chat data (Paragraph [0032] teaches video conferencing)
Claim(s) 12, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench, Brannon in view of Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936) in further view of Dods (US 11,769,577)
Regarding Claim 12,
Wrench, Brannon and Balasaygun teaches the system of claim 11, but does not explicitly teach wherein the platform is further configured to:receive attestation documentation from the first user; and generate a second distributed ledger transaction based on the attestation documentation; and add the second distributed ledger transaction to the distributed ledger associated with the distributed ledger node.
Dodds (US 11,769,577) teaches receive attestation documentation from the first user; and generate a second distributed ledger transaction based on the attestation documentation; and add the second distributed ledger transaction to the distributed ledger associated with the distributed ledger node (Col. 8, lines 46-48, teaches receiving “identity documentation identifying the user”)(Col. 8, lines 55-58, teaches storing identity documentation in the distributed ledger)(Col. 14, lines 1-5, teaches generating electronic transactions by participants recorded to the distributed ledger)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench and Balasaygun to receive attestation documentation of the first user
The motivation is to authenticate the first user (Col. 1, lines 50-55 of Dods)
Claim(s) 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench, Brannon in further view of Dods (US 11,769,577)
Regarding Claim 13,
Wrench, Brannon teaches the system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the platform is further configured to: prompt the first user to provide attestation documentation to the platform; receive the attestation documentation from the first user; and verify the attestation documentation against at least one of an external database or a distributed ledger.
Dodds (US 11,769,577) teaches prompt the first user to provide attestation documentation to the platform; receive the attestation documentation from the first user; and verify the attestation documentation against at least one of an external database or a distributed ledger (Col. 12 lines 22-38, teaches prompting the user to enter authentication process and verify the documentation against data stored in private data store)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench with the authentication method of Dodds
The motivation is to provide re-authentication or re-credentialing (Dodds, Col. 12 lines 22-38)
Regarding Claim 14,
Wrench, Brannon and Dodds teaches the system of claim 13 but do not explicitly teach wherein the platform is configured to prompt the first user to provide the attestation document in response to at least one of: the first user attempting to join the first secure room; or the first user attempting to provide the first interaction data to the platform.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench and Dodds to prompt for attestation (as taught by Dodds) when joining a first secure room (as taught by Wrench) and the results would be predictable (i.e. a prompt for attestation when joining a secure room)
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench in view of Balasaygun (US 2020/0119936) in view of Sambamurthy (US 2014/0283016) in view of Bannon
Regarding Claim 18,
Wrench, Balasaygun, Sambamurthy teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 16, but does not explicitly teach further comprising: detecting, via an artificial intelligence model of the platform, the presence of a first predetermined word in the interaction data; and replacing, via the artificial intelligence model, the first predetermined word in the interaction data with a second predetermined word prior to the platform making the at least a portion of the interaction data viewable by the second user.
Brannon (US 2022/0264180) teaches detecting, via an artificial intelligence model of the platform, the presence of a first predetermined word in the interaction data; and replacing, via the artificial intelligence model, the first predetermined word in the interaction data with a second predetermined word prior to the platform making the at least a portion of the interaction data viewable by the second user. (Paragraph [0044, 0066] teaches a video conference wherein words are removed ore replaced)(Paragraph [0060] teaches redaction system uses a machine-learning model)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench in view of the method of replacing or removing words in Brannon
The motivation is to redact sensitive or inappropriate information (Paragraph [0048])
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wrench, Balasaygun, Sambamurthy in view of Dodds
Regarding Claim 19,
Wrench, Balasaygun, Sambamurthy teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 16, but does not explicitly teach further comprising: prompting the first user to provide attestation documentation to the platform; receive, at the platform, the attestation documentation from the first user; and recording at least a portion of the attestation documentation on the distributed ledger.
Dodds (US 11,769,577) teaches prompt the first user to provide attestation documentation to the platform; receive the attestation documentation from the first user; and verify the attestation documentation against at least one of an external database or a distributed ledger (Col. 12 lines 22-38, teaches prompting the user to enter authentication process and verify the documentation against data stored in private data store)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wrench with the authentication method of Dodds
The motivation is to provide re-authentication or re-credentialing (Dodds, Col. 12 lines 22-38)
(Col. 12 lines 22-38, teaches prompting the user to enter authentication process and verify the documentation against data stored in private data store)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARRIS C WANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1462. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, LUU PHAM can be reached on 571-270-5002. 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.
/HARRIS C WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2439