DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/25/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of the claims, Applicant argues that recitation of a “user recognition configuration session for each user, wherein the method comprises storing, in memory hardware... the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username.” In the claims 1 and 11 include specification descriptions of the features as being Mel-Frequency Cepstrum Coefficient (MFCC) features that a human cannot process or store mentally, and that the claims further recite establishing a user’s identity by comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware, while providing technological improvements in voice based authentication and as such argues the recitations preclude the claims from being performed mentally, and as a result, argues that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea (Arguments, pg. 8-11, sec. 5).
Examiner respectfully disagrees as limitations “during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device: receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device” corresponds to a data gathering and analysis step with a user device, where a user can listen to a pronunciation of a password to determine whether to grant access, while “establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session” also corresponds to a data analysis/judgement step with a user device, where a user can mentally compare audio to determine whether to grant access. If a claim, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it is still in the mental processes category unless the claim cannot practically be performed in the mind (See Intellectual Ventures LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Furthermore, there is no evidence of a technological improvement beyond granting/restricting access to a user based on a comparison of the user’s voice to known stored voices.
As provided in the rejection below, the claimed language includes steps of gathering, analyzing, storing and comparing data without significantly more, and as such, Examiner maintains the rejection of the claims.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection of the claims, Applicant argues that the claims as amended are definite (Arguments, pg. 11).
Examiner respectfully disagrees as the independent claims still recite “based on the established identify-identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, processing the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one personal resource of an associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance” and “accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation.”. There is no antecedent basis for “the required one of the personal resources.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 1 and 11 and references Chadha and Sugiyama not disclosing limitations “associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user with a corresponding username for the corresponding user” and “storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances.” as well as subsequent limitations “establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session” and “determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword” have been considered but are moot in light of new grounds of rejection with reference Reuss and Clark as provided in the rejection below.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Patent
(US 11,557,301 B2)
Instant Application
(18/149,255)
1. A method comprising: during a user recognition configuration session for each of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment:
storing, on a voice-based authentication device having access to an associated set of personal resources for each of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, audio features of a hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances, the hotword comprising a predetermined fixed term that is common to each of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment; and
associating, by the voice-based authentication device, the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user with the associated set of personal resources for the corresponding user;
receiving, at the voice-based authentication device, a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance comprising the hotword and a query, the query requesting an operation for the voice-based authentication device to perform for the one of the plurality of different users that spoke the first utterance;
after receiving the first utterance, establishing, by the voice-based authentication device, an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance based on audio features of a portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword;
in response to establishing the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, invoking, by the voice-based authentication device, an automated speech recognizer to process the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify: the operation for the voice-based authentication device to perform; and one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance associated with the query and that requires access by the voice-based authentication device to perform the operation; and
accessing, by the voice-based authentication device, the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation, the personal resource unique to the user that spoke the first utterance.
1. A computer-implemented method executed on data processing hardware that causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device:
receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device;
associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user; and
storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances;
receiving a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance captured by the voice-based authentication device and comprising the hotword and a query;
establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session; and
determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword
based on the established identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, processing the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one personal resource of an associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance;
accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation
Claims 1, 3-11 and 13-20 of the instant application are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1, 3-11 and 13-20 of patent US 11,557,301 B2. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference Murthi (US 2013/0132095 A1) discloses “during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device” (para. [0066]-[0067]; para. [0069]-[0070]; para. [0072]; para. [0077]) and “receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device” (para. [0068]), while the reference Reuss (US 2009/0281809 A1) discloses: “associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user” (para. [0021]; para. [0078]), “storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances” (fig. 16A-16C; para. [0021]) and “establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users” (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; para. [0021]; para. [0023]; para. [0038]; para. [0072]).
It would have been obvious to implement the missing features of the instant application, as taught by Murthi and Reuss for all the reasons described by the references such allowing members of a family activate a computing device to an active mode (Murthi, para. [0072]; para. [0074]) and in preventing unauthorized access to a user's private information (Reuss, para. [0003]; para. [0022]).
Patent
(US 10,438,591 B2)
Instant Application
(18/149,255)
1. A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, by a voice-based authentication device that includes an automated speech recognizer and has access to an associated set of personal resources for each of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment, a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of users that includes a hotword and a query, the hotword comprising a predetermined fixed term that is common to each of the plurality of users in the multi-user environment and that, when spoken in an utterance by any of the plurality of users in the multi-user environment, triggers the voice-based authentication device to: invoke the automated speech recognizer to process all terms following the hotword in the spoken utterance; and
perform speaker identification to identify which user of the plurality of users in the multi-user environment spoke the first utterance based solely on the hotword comprising the predetermined fixed term that is common to each of plurality of users in the multi-user environment;
after receiving the first utterance, determining, by the voice-based authentication device, that the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword fail to successfully establish an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance; prompting, by the voice-based authentication device, the user that spoke the first utterance to provide an identification utterance that identifies the user; receiving, by the voice-based authentication device, the identification utterance spoken by the user;
in response to identifying the user that spoke the first utterance based on processing the identification utterance using the automated speech recognizer: accessing, by the voice-based authentication device, one of the personal resources from the associated set of personal resources for the identified user to generate a verification question associated with a prior action performed by the identified user using the accessed personal resource; and
providing, by the voice-based authentication device, the verification question for output as synthesized speech;
processing, by the voice-based authentication device, the query in the first utterance using the automated speech recognizer to identify an operation to perform that requires access by the voice-based authentication device to one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance; and
providing, by the voice-based authentication device, a response to the query in the first utterance based on performing the identified operation.
1. A computer-implemented method executed on data processing hardware that causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device:
receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device;
associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user; and
storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances;
receiving a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance captured by the voice-based authentication device and comprising the hotword and a query;
establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session; and
determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword
based on the established identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, processing the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one personal resource of an associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance;
accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation
Claims 1-4, 9-14, 19 and 20 of the instant application are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-5, 8-12 and 15-29 of patent US 10,438,591 B2. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference Murthi (US 2013/0132095 A1) discloses “during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device” (para. [0066]-[0067]; para. [0069]-[0070]; para. [0072]; para. [0077]) and “receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device” (para. [0068]), while the reference Reuss (US 2009/0281809 A1) discloses: “associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user” (para. [0021]; para. [0078]), “storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances” (fig. 16A-16C; para. [0021]) and “establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users” (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; para. [0021]; para. [0023]; para. [0038]; para. [0072]).
It would have been obvious to implement the missing features of the instant application, as taught by Murthi and Reuss for all the reasons described by the references such allowing members of a family activate a computing device to an active mode (Murthi, para. [0072]; para. [0074]) and in preventing unauthorized access to a user's private information (Reuss, para. [0003]; para. [0022]).
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 1-4, 6-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to the abstract idea of speech/command analysis without significantly more. The claims 1 and 11 recite steps of: during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device: receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device (i.e., a data gathering and analysis step), associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user (i.e., a data analysis/evaluation step), storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances (i.e., a data storage step), receiving a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance captured by the voice-based authentication device and comprising the hotword and a query (i.e., a data gathering step), establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session (i.e., a data analysis/judgement step), determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword (i.e., a data analysis/judgement step), based on the established identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, processing the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one personal resource of an associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance and accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation (i.e., a data analysis step), corresponding to steps achievable by a human in manually/mentally analyzing provided speech to determine whether to provide or restrict access to resources, and as such, the mental processes category of abstract ideas as well certain methods of organizing human activities categories of abstract ideas. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims are directed to an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements, where the generically recited computer elements (computer-implemented method, device, system, hardware, memory) do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because steps “based on the established identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, processing the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one personal resource of an associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance” and “accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation” correspond to the well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions of collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05 and as provided by cited references Reuss and Clark (see instant PTO 892 form), also, see Prism Techs. LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 696 F. App’x 1014, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2017).
The dependent claims 2-4, 6-10, 12-14 and 16-20 also recite mental processes and certain methods of organizing human activities and do not add significantly more than the abstract idea, and are as such similarly rejected.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-14 and 16-20 are 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.
Claims 1 and 11 still recite “to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one or more personal resource … accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources …”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the required one of the personal resources” in the claims. A “required access” does not correspond to a “required one of the personal resources”. The dependent claims are rejected based on their dependency. The language is interpreted as claimed. Appropriate correction is required.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
1. Claims 1-4, 7, 8, 11-14, 17 and 18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Murthi et al US 2013/0132095 A1 (“Murthi”) in view of Reuss US 2009/0281809 A1 (“Reuss”) and Clark et al US 2007/0073536 A1 (“Clark”)
Per claim 1, Murthi discloses a computer-implemented method executed on data processing hardware that causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device: receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device (para. [0066]-[0067]; FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing a sequence of steps where one or more users may each generate and store an activation phrase …, para. [0069]-[0070]; For example, where members of a family or group each use the system 10 … The activation phrase generated and stored by each user may the same …, para. [0072]; para. [0077]);
receiving a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance captured by the voice-based authentication device and comprising the hotword (para. [0068]);
Murthi does not explicitly disclose associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user, storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances, establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session or determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword
However, these features are taught by Reuss:
associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user (voice print identification is used. A voice print match (also referred to herein as "speaker recognition") is highly accurate and identifies an individual based upon the use of a predetermined user provided identifying phrase (herein also referred to as the "voice print phrase key")…. the user initially inputs a predetermined voice print phrase key or keys into the voice print identification system for use as the benchmark against which all future user accesses are compared…. In an example where a headset may be used by multiple users …, para. [0021]; for each authorized user of the headset, database 1522 will include the user name/ID 1602, voice print phrase key 1604, and password/PIN 1606. …, para. [0078]); and
storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances (fig. 16A-16C; para. [0021]);
establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; In one example, the user initially inputs a predetermined voice print phrase key or keys into the voice print identification system for use as the benchmark against which all future user accesses are compared. Each time the user wishes to use the headset that is protected by the voice print identification system, the user must speak the predetermined voice print phrase key for comparison with the stored phrase. The user response must come within an acceptable range of similarity with the pre-stored voice print phrase key. In an example where a headset may be used by multiple users …, para. [0021]; para. [0023]; para. [0038]; para. [0072]); and
determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; para. [0021]; The authenticator device further includes a voice print match application for receiving the user speech corresponding to a submitted voice print phrase key upon receiving notification of the donned condition, where the user speech is compared to the pre-determined voice print phrase key to validate an identity of the authorized headset user, para. [0027])
Murthi in view of Reuss does not explicitly disclose receiving a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance captured by the voice-based authentication device and comprising the hotword and a query, based on the established identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, processing the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one personal resource of an associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance or accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation
However, these features are taught by Clark:
receiving a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance captured by the voice-based authentication device and comprising the hotword and a query (para. [0020]; the user 14 is required to utter a "detectable" activation command in order to "wake up" the communication device 12. By "detectable" is meant an activation command that can be detected by the speech recognition module 48 …, para. [0034]; An example of a detectable activation command may be the spoken utterance "phone on" …, para. [0035]; para. [0062]; the speech recognition module 36 may consult a new database 526, which stores biometric indicia (referred to as voice prints) for each of the users who subscribes to the voice-activated call origination service…., para. [0063]; one possible joint activation and origination command, which includes a recipient identifier, may contain an utterance such as "phone on voice mail".…, para. [0065]);
based on the established identity of the user that spoke the first utterance, processing the query following the hotword in the first utterance to identify an operation to perform that requires access to one personal resource of an associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance (para. [0020]; the user 14 is required to utter a "detectable" activation command in order to "wake up" the communication device 12. By "detectable" is meant an activation command that can be detected by the speech recognition module 48 …, para. [0034]; An example of a detectable activation command may be the spoken utterance "phone on" …, para. [0035]; Thus, it can be said that the speech recognition module 36 performs biometric signal processing to authenticate the user 14, para. [0062]; the speech recognition module 36 may consult a new database 526, which stores biometric indicia (referred to as voice prints) for each of the users who subscribes to the voice-activated call origination service…., para. [0063]; one possible joint activation and origination command, which includes a recipient identifier, may contain an utterance such as "phone on voice mail".…, para. [0065]);
accessing the required one of the personal resources of the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance to perform the identified operation (Reference is made to FIG. 1, which depicts a communication device 12 that may be employed by a user 14 to effect various call origination and call answering activities, including but not limited to placing a telephone call to a called party device, dialing-in to a server to check the user's voice mail messages and answering an incoming call …, para. [0020]; para. [0025]; one possible joint activation and origination command, which includes a recipient identifier, may contain an utterance such as "phone on voice mail".…, para. [0065])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Reuss with the method of Murthi in arriving at the missing features of Murthi, as well as to combine the teachings of Clark with the method of Murthi in view of Reuss in arriving at the missing features of Murthi in view of Reuss, because such combination would have resulted in preventing unauthorized access to a user's private information (Reuss, para. [0003]; para. [0022]).as well as in protecting mobile users from abuse of their subscription to the voice-activated services (Clark, para. [0067]).
Per claim 2, Murthi in view of Reuss and Clark discloses the method of claim 1,
Clark discloses wherein the hotword when spoken in an utterance by any of the plurality of different users, triggers the voice-based authentication device to: invoke an automated speech recognizer to process the query following the hotword in the spoken utterance (para. [0034]-[0035]; para. [0062]-[0065]); and
Reuss discloses perform speaker identification to identify which user of the plurality of different users spoke the utterance based solely on the hotword (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; para. [0021]; The authenticator device further includes a voice print match application for receiving the user speech corresponding to a submitted voice print phrase key upon receiving notification of the donned condition, where the user speech is compared to the pre-determined voice print phrase key to validate an identity of the authorized headset user, para. [0027])
Per claim 3, Murthi in view of Reuss and Clark discloses the method of claim 1,
Reuss discloses wherein the operations further comprise, for each of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment: receiving the corresponding username for each of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment (fig. 16A; para. [0072]; para. [0078]); and
Clark discloses: associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user with the associated set of personal resources for the corresponding user (fig. 5B; para. [0030]; para. [0062]-[0065]).
Per claim 4, Murthi in view of Reuss and Clark discloses the method of claim 3, wherein:
Reuss discloses: establishing the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance comprises determining the corresponding username of the user that spoke the first utterance (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; para. [0021]; para. [0023]; para. [0038]; para. [0072]); and
Clark discloses accessing the required one of the personal resources comprises accessing the required one of the personal resources from the associated set of personal resources for the user that spoke the first utterance based on the corresponding username of the user that spoke the first utterance (fig. 5B; para. [0030]; para. [0062]-[0065]).
Per claim 7, Murthi in view of Reuss and Clark discloses the method of claim 1,
Clark discloses wherein the associated set of personal resources for each of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment comprise at least one of a contact list, calendar, email, voicemail, social networks, biographical information, or financial information (para. [0020]; para. [0062]-[0065]).
Per claim 8, Murthi in view of Reuss and Clark discloses the method of claim 1,
Clark discloses wherein at least one personal resource of the associated set of personal resources is distributed across one or more server computer systems in communication with the voice-based authentication device (para. [0020]; para. [0062]-[0065]).
Per claim 11, Murthi discloses a system comprising:
data processing hardware (para. [0034]); and
memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware and storing instructions that when executed on the data processing hardware cause the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising: during a user recognition configuration session, for each corresponding user of a plurality of different users in a multi-user environment sharing a voice-based authentication device: receiving audio features of a same hotword spoken by the corresponding user in one or more user-identification utterances captured by a microphone of the voice-based authentication device (para. [0066]-[0067]; FIG. 4 is a flowchart showing a sequence of steps where one or more users may each generate and store an activation phrase …, para. [0069]-[0070]; For example, where members of a family or group each use the system 10 … The activation phrase generated and stored by each user may the same …, para. [0072]; para. [0077]);
receiving a first utterance spoken by one of the plurality of different users in the multi-user environment, the first utterance captured by the voice-based authentication device and comprising the hotword (para. [0068]);
Murthi does not explicitly disclose associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user, storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances, establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session or determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword
However, these features are taught by Reuss:
associating the audio features of the hotword spoken by the corresponding user in the one or more user-identification utterances with a corresponding username for the corresponding user (voice print identification is used. A voice print match (also referred to herein as "speaker recognition") is highly accurate and identifies an individual based upon the use of a predetermined user provided identifying phrase (herein also referred to as the "voice print phrase key")…. the user initially inputs a predetermined voice print phrase key or keys into the voice print identification system for use as the benchmark against which all future user accesses are compared…. In an example where a headset may be used by multiple users …, para. [0021]; for each authorized user of the headset, database 1522 will include the user name/ID 1602, voice print phrase key 1604, and password/PIN 1606. …, para. [0078]); and
storing, in memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware, the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username for the corresponding user that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances (fig. 16A-16C; para. [0021]);
establishing an identity of the user that spoke the first utterance by: comparing audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword to the audio features of the hotword associated with the corresponding username stored in the memory hardware for each corresponding user of the plurality of different users that spoke the hotword in the one or more user-identification utterances during the user recognition configuration session (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; In one example, the user initially inputs a predetermined voice print phrase key or keys into the voice print identification system for use as the benchmark against which all future user accesses are compared. Each time the user wishes to use the headset that is protected by the voice print identification system, the user must speak the predetermined voice print phrase key for comparison with the stored phrase. The user response must come within an acceptable range of similarity with the pre-stored voice print phrase key. In an example where a headset may be used by multiple users …, para. [0021]; para. [0023]; para. [0038]; para. [0072]); and
determining the identity of the user that spoke the first utterance as the corresponding username associated with the audio features stored in the memory hardware that match the audio features of the portion of the first utterance that corresponds to the hotword (fig. 16A, elements 1602, 1604; para. [0021]; The authenticator device further includes a voice print match application for receiving the user speech corresponding to a submitted voice print phrase key upon receiving notification o