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 and amendments with respect to claims 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheet (US 10,708434) in view of Jaynes (US 20200396416) in view of Ashana (US 20070150583).
Regarding claim 1, Scheet teaches, a network element, (Fig. 2, el. 230: conference bridge server and Col. 2, lines 58-62) comprising: one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable non- transitory storage media coupled to the one or more processors and
comprising instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the network element to perform operations (server will inherently discloses processor and storage to perform all the functions) comprising:
receiving, from a meetings application a request to register a trigger (Col. 3, lines 23-35: a button or menu option may be embedded within a calendar application, such as OUTLOOK or other mail/calendar applications. The user device may call into the conference bridge manually to register via a phone or SMS text messaging. At any time, the conference bridge 130 may store the user device information profile and reference the information to identify and authorize the user device. Also, the profile may be linked to callback options, including devices to be called, a time to call (e.g., once all other participants have joined, 5 minutes prior, 10 minutes prior, 1 minute prior, once the leader has joined, etc.). Also, other options may include to send a web link to access the conference, dial the user device as a call, initiate the conference application on the device and (Col. 4, lines: 15-35, “the
trigger reads on authorize and identity of the phone, call back number), wherein the trigger comprises a target, an event, and an action set (Col. 4, lines 24-35: date of call, time of call (including time zone), conference code, phone number, website URL);
registering the trigger with an actions manager (Col. 4, lines 45- 53: link or message that is used to join the conference and Col. 5, lines 55-65 and col. 6, lines 57-65);
receiving, from a mobile device application, event metadata; comparing the event metadata to the trigger; and communicating a response to the mobile device application (Col. 4, lines 30-35: at a scheduled time, such as to a mobile phone or other phone associated with a user account, for example, a leader option to require re- authorization at time of a call may provide examples of data gathered at registration time: date of call, time of call (including time zone), conference code, phone number and Col. 5, lines 8-10).
Scheet does not teach instructing, via the response, the mobile device application to automatically perform the action set, wherein the action set joins a user to a meeting without interaction from the user.
Jaynes in the same art of endeavor teaches in a video conference room (abstract), wherein instructing, via the response, the mobile device application to automatically perform the action set, wherein the action set joins a user to a meeting without interaction from the user (Paragraph 24: The client-host display 208(1) is automatically shared to the room-host system 201 for display on shared display 203. In embodiments, a user interface may be displayed on the shared room display 203 and/or the client-host device display 208(1) that may make use of the meeting metadata, for example, “Launching your “WebEx “meeting”. Because the URI is generated by the original meeting invite, a user is able to automatically start and even join the meeting without the user having to manually implement the workflow that would be presented had the user simply clicked the meeting invite).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Scheet with Scheet in order to improve the system and enhance the user’s experience to join the conference in a fast and efficient way.
Scheet in view of Jaynes does not explicitly teach the action set represents a preloaded sequence of actions, automatically perform the preloaded sequence of actions in the action set in a pre-defined order.
Asthana in the same art of endeavor teaches a trigger-based conference (abstract), the action set represents a preloaded sequence of actions, automatically perform the preloaded sequence of actions in the action set in a pre-defined order (Paragraph 27: Example actions 210 can include: (i) execution of a particular script (e.g., executing a sequence of actions based on a trigger); (ii) dial-out (e.g., to call a prospective conference participant directly from the conference); (iii) eject a participant; (iv) change conference policy (e.g., allow/disallow video or change security attributes); (v) execute a floor operation (e.g., open/close the floor, bring the conference into session, or grant a questioner the right to speak); (vi) send a message via text messaging; (vii) send a message via e-mail; (viii) lock/unlock a conference (e.g., disallow anyone else from joining the conference or allow anyone to join); (ix) controlling an enabling of an encryption; (x) bringing the conference into session; (xi) polling participants; (xii) creating or destroying a breakout session; (xiii) displaying a specific piece of content; (xiv) muting some or all of the participants; and/or (xv) executing an interactive voice response script for one or more participants).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Scheet in view of Jaynes with Asthana in order to improve the system and enhance user’s experience by providing, fast, reliable and customized conference.
Regarding claim 2, Scheet in view of Jaynesin in view of Asthana teaches, the operations further comprising: determining, in response to comparing the event metadata to the trigger, that the event of the trigger matches the event metadata (Fig. 1, the figure shows the steps to validate the data and prompt the user to join the conference).
Regarding claim 3, Scheet in view of Jaynes in view of Asthana teaches, receiving a first registration request from the meetings application; registering the meetings application with the actions manager (Col. 3, lines 23-35); receiving a second registration request from the mobile device application; and registering the mobile device application with the actions manager (Fig. 1, el. 126 and Fig. 3, el. 316).
Regarding claim 5, Scheet in view of Jaynes in view of Asthana teaches, wherein the meetings application and the mobile device application are stored on one of the following: a mobile device; or a vehicular communication system (mobile device: Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Scheet in view of Jaynes in view of Asthana teaches, wherein the actions manager represents one of the following: a cloud service; an application stored on a mobile device; or an application stored on a vehicular communication system (Col. 3, lines 36-50).
Regarding claim 7, Scheet in view of Jaynes in view of Asthana teaches, wherein the action set is associated with a public switched telephone network (PSTN) audio connection (Col. 8, lines 22-23: voice network).
Regarding claim 8, see claims 1-2 rejection.
Regarding claim 9, see claims 2 rejections.
Regarding claim 10, see claim 3 rejections.
Regarding claim 12, see claim 5 rejections.
Regarding claim 13, see claim 6 rejections.
Regarding claim 14, see claim 7 rejections.
Regarding claim 15, see claim 1 rejection.
Regarding claim 16, see claim 2 rejections.
Regarding claim 17, see claim 3 rejections.
Regarding claim 19, see claim 5 rejections.
Regarding claim 20, see claim 6 rejections.
Claims 7, 11, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheet (US 10,708434) in view of Jaynes (US 20200396416) in view of Jaynes in view of Asthana (US 20200396416) in view of Jones (US 20110271197).
Regarding claim 4, Scheet in view of Jaynes in view of Jaynes in view of Asthana teaches, wherein: the target comprises at least two of the following identifiers: a first identifier of the mobile device application (Col. 5, lines 8-10); and a second identifier of a user of the mobile device application; the event comprises a calling party number (phone number); and the action set comprises at least one of the following actions: answer (Fog. 3, el. 316: click to access); mute, and enter a predetermined dual tone multi- frequency (DTMF) number.
Scheet in view of Jaynes does not teach mute as claimed above.
Jones in the same art of endeavor teach control function including muting (Paragraph 157, 311).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to modify Scheet with Jones in order to improve the system and enhance the user’s experience and allow more functions.
Regarding claim 11, see claim 4 rejections.
Regarding claim 18, see claim 4 rejections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA EL-ZOOBI whose telephone number is (571)270-3434. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4.
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, Carolyn Edward can be reached at (571)270-7136. 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.
/MARIA EL-ZOOBI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights