Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/231,667

SYSTEM FOR AN AGENT TO SIMULTANEOUSLY SERVICE MULTIPLE CUSTOMER DEVICES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 08, 2023
Examiner
AL AUBAIDI, RASHA S
Art Unit
2693
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Mitel Networks Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
577 granted / 744 resolved
+15.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
782
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.2%
-29.8% vs TC avg
§103
55.9%
+15.9% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 744 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/10/2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment 2. This in response to an RCE amendment filed 02/10/2026. No claims have been added. Claims 1, 3, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16 and 20 have been amended. No claims been canceled. Claims 1-20 are now pending in this application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 3. 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Odinak et al. (US PAT # 9,942401 B2) in view of Jolliff et al. (Pub.No.: 2009/0300525 A1) and further in view of FREEDMAN et al. (Pub.No.: 2011/0206198 A1). Regarding claims 1 and 7, Odinak teaches a computer system and method in which an agent can simultaneously interact with multiple customers (reads on “up four sessions can be presented to agent simultaneously, see col. 11, lines 37-38. Also, see abstract), the computer system and method comprising: a call center server configured to communicate with (a) a plurality of customer devices (see Fig. 1 and corresponding text), and (b) an agent device having a graphical user interface (GUI) configured to permit an agent to enter text into the agent device (see co. 11, lines 26-46); and a text-to-speech (TTS) engine that converts text entered into the agent device into speech that is transmitted by the call center server to the two or more of the plurality of customer devices (see col. 13, lines 32-51 and Fig. 3A). Odinak features are already addressed in the above rejection. Odinak does not specifically teach “wherein the converted normal speech is based on an avatar of the agent”. However, Jolliff teaches in a method and system for automatically updating avatar to indicate users status, the instant messaging (IM) context, avatars, sometimes referred to as buddy icons, are usually small images. For example, IM icons are 48. times.48 pixels, although many icons can be found online that typically measure anywhere from 50. times.50 pixels to 100.times.100 pixels in size. A wide variety of these imaged avatars can be found on web sites and popular eGroups such as Yahoo! Groups. The latest use of avatars in instant messaging is dominated by dynamic avatars. The user chooses an avatar that represents him while chatting and, through the use of text to speech technology, enables the avatar to talk the text being used at the chat window. Another form of use for this kind of avatar is for video chats/calls. Some services, such as Skype (through some external plug-ins) allow users to use talking avatars during video calls, replacing the image from the user's camera with an animated, talking avatar (see [0005]). Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the avatar TTS of Jolliff into the teaching of Odinak in order to allow TTS output to be presented trough an avatar representing the user to improve personalization and user engagement. One of an ordinary skill would have been motivated to use such an avatar-based speech output in the call center environment of the primary reference (i.e., Odinak) to provide more natural, consistent agent persona across simultaneous communications. Odinak and Jolliff feature already addressed in the rejection of claims 1 and 7. Neither Odinak nor Jolliff specifically teach “a chat monitor configured to (1) identify and answer a customer question from two or more of the plurality of customer devices and (2) interject speech-related nuances to the two or more of the plurality of customer devices in order to simulate actual conversation if the agent is engaged in another communication or otherwise distracted, wherein the chat monitor uses normal speech of the agent to answer the customer question and interject speech-related nuances”. However, Freedman teaches conversational interaction and answering behavior of the agent, where monitoring agent activity while the agent is engaged in interaction with a customer (see [0045]) and customer-agent interaction, the agent talking time, bursts into the customer speech, see [0062] and agent responds to repeated requests of a customer by repeating the same sequence of words in his answer, see [0059]. Thus, Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the avatar-based speech output of Jolliff into the call-center communication system of Odinak, as informed by the conversational interaction teachings of Freedman, in order to provide avatar-based conversational speech output representing the agent during simultaneous communications with customers, thereby improving personalization and conversational realism in multi-customer call center interactions. Independent claim 7, is a method claim and it is rejected for the same reason addressed in independent claim 1. For the claimed feature of “wherein the text-to-voice translator translates the symbols or text into voice on at least one of the plurality of customer devices in communication with the agent device” as recited in independent claim 7, see col. 12, lines 2-11. Regarding claim 2, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teach wherein the TTS engine is configured to convert SMS messages, email messages, and/or chat messages from the agent device to speech on each of the plurality of customer devices (see col. 13, lines 32-51 and Fig. 3A and col. 9, lines 13-32). Regarding claim 3, the combination of Odinak and Jolliff teaches wherein the agent has the option to utilize voice communications sent from the agent device to any of the plurality of customer devices (see col. 3, lines 31-59). Regarding claim 4, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein the conference call center server is further configured to receive a command from any of the plurality of customer devices to communicate with the agent device by speech or by text (reads on the instruction received form the user, see Fig. 18 and corresponding text. FIG. 18 is a flow chart diagram showing a method for communicating with the system of FIG. 3A. First, a user inputs voice instructions (block 201) into the vehicle system 191 via the user interface 192. Next, the processor 193 performs voice recognition processing (block 202) on the received voice instructions to determine the content of the instructions. Results from the voice recognition processing is presented to the user (block 203) via the user interface 192 in the form of verbal communication over a speaker system or text messaging on a visual display. The user can determine whether the voice instructions were correctly interpreted (block 204). If the processor 193 has interpreted the inputted voice instructions properly, the user can instruct the vehicle system 191 to send the processed instructions to a predefined destination, such as a server (block 208). Other destinations are possible. Otherwise, the user has an opportunity to contact a human operator to make sure the instructions are properly entered (block 205). If the user decides to contact the human operator, a digest of the interaction between the user and the processor 193 is sent to a human operator 196 (block 206) at an operator system 195. The user is connected to the human operator (block 206), who is tending the operator system 195, including a phone and a computer terminal. The user and the human operator resolve the content of the user-initiated instructions. If the user does not want to be connected to a human operator, the user can return to providing new voice instructions (block 201)). Regarding claims 5 and 12, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein the call center server is configured to generate typical speech-related nuances that are included in the speech generated by the TTS engine (reads on pre-recorded “canned” sound bites are stored for efficient playback. These sound bites provide informational and navigational messages to all callers, see Fig. 3A and col. 10, lines 16-20 also line 50-66). Regarding claim 6, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches includes the plurality of customer devices and wherein each of the plurality of customer devices includes an electronic display configured to display text generated by the agent device (the display is on user’s cellular phone 13 as shown in Fig. 1 and discussed in corresponding text of Odinak). Regarding claim 8, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein the text-to-voice translator utilizes TTS (see Odinak, element 37 as shown in Fig. 3A and corresponding text). Regarding claim 9, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein the call center server provides the agent with the option to select the use of voice communications sent from the agent device to any of the plurality of customer devices (see Odinak, col. 3, lines 31-59). Regarding claim 10, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein if the call center server detects a pause or interruption in a communication from the agent device to one of the plurality of customer devices it is configured to fill the pause (this reads on communication between the customer and the agent can be archived for some period of time. The archived communication can be used to review or make a copy of old communication, see Odinak, col. 22, lines 56-59) or interruption with a voice filler. Regarding claim 11, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein the call center server is further configured to answer some questions posed by a customer without input from the agent (reads on automated voice response system utilized for troubleshooting, see Odinak, col. 6, lines 38-42). Regarding claim 13, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein speech by a customer is converted by the call center server to text on the agent device utilizing an automatic speech recognition (ASR) engine (reads on voice recognition that is required to process voice calls, see Odinak, col. 9, lines 2-5). Regarding claim 14, the combination of Odinak, Jolliff and FREEDMAN teaches wherein the call center server is further configured to generate bots that are configured to communicate with one or more of the plurality of customer devices, wherein the call center server is configured to control the bots’ communications (reads on automated agent, see Odinak, col. 6, lines 31-57 and Fig. 2). Regarding claim 15, Odinak teaches a computer system configured to permit an agent to simultaneously conduct multiple customer interactions (see Odinak col. 11, lines 1-63, the computer system comprising: a call center server in communication configured to communicate with (a) a plurality of customer devices and (b) an agent device having a GUI configured to permit an agent to enter text into the agent device (see Odinak col. 11, lines 1-63); a text-to-speech (TTS) engine that converts text entered into the agent device into speech that is received by one or more of the plurality of customer devices (see Odinak col. 13, lines 32-51 and Fig. 3A); and one or more bots generated by the call center server, wherein each of the one or more bots is configured to communicate with each of the plurality of customer devices without input from the agent device (reads on automated agent, see Odinak, col. 6, lines 31-57 and Fig. 2). Odinak features are already addressed in the above rejection. Odinak does not specifically teach “wherein the converted normal speech is based on an avatar of the agent”. However, Jolliff teaches in a method and system for automatically updating avatar to indicate users status, the instant messaging (IM) context, avatars, sometimes referred to as buddy icons, are usually small images. For example, IM icons are 48. times.48 pixels, although many icons can be found online that typically measure anywhere from 50. times.50 pixels to 100.times.100 pixels in size. A wide variety of these imaged avatars can be found on web sites and popular eGroups such as Yahoo! Groups. The latest use of avatars in instant messaging is dominated by dynamic avatars. The user chooses an avatar that represents him while chatting and, through the use of text to speech technology, enables the avatar to talk the text being used at the chat window. Another form of use for this kind of avatar is for video chats/calls. Some services, such as Skype (through some external plug-ins) allow users to use talking avatars during video calls, replacing the image from the user's camera with an animated, talking avatar (see [0005]). Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the avatar TTS of Jolliff into the teaching of Odinak in order to allow TTS output to be presented trough an avatar representing the user to improve personalization and user engagement. One of an ordinary skill would have been motivated to use such an avatar-based speech output in the call center environment of the primary reference (i.e., Odinak) to provide more natural, consistent agent persona across simultaneous communications. Odinak and Jolliff feature already addressed in the rejection of claims 1 and 7. Neither Odinak nor Jolliff specifically teach “a chat monitor configured to (1) identify and answer a customer question from two or more of the plurality of customer devices and (2) interject speech-related nuances to the two or more of the plurality of customer devices in order to simulate actual conversation if the agent is engaged in another communication or otherwise distracted, wherein the chat monitor uses normal speech of the agent to answer the customer question and interject speech-related nuances”. However, Freedman teaches conversational interaction and answering behavior of the agent, where monitoring agent activity while the agent is engaged in interaction with a customer (see [0045]) and customer-agent interaction, the agent talking time, bursts into the customer speech, see [0062] and agent responds to repeated requests of a customer by repeating the same sequence of words in his answer, see [0059]. Thus, Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the avatar-based speech output of Jolliff into the call-center communication system of Odinak, as informed by the conversational interaction teachings of Freedman, in order to provide avatar-based conversational speech output representing the agent during simultaneous communications with customers, thereby improving personalization and conversational realism in multi-customer call center interactions. Regarding claim 16, the combination of Odinak and Jolliff teaches wherein the call center server is configured to permit (a) a plurality of customer devices to simultaneously contact one agent device, and/or (b) a plurality of agent devices to simultaneously interact with a customer device, such that a plurality of customers and/or a plurality of agents can simultaneously interact (reads on “up four sessions can be presented to agent simultaneously, see Odinak, col. 11, 37-38. Also, see abstract of the invention). Regarding claim 17, the combination of Odinak and Jolliff teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of customer devices is configured to communicate with the call center server by voice (see Odinak, col. 6, lines 1-5). Regarding claim 18, the combination of Odinak and Jolliff teaches wherein one or more of the plurality of customer devices is configured to communicate to the agent device by TTS (see Odinak, col. 21, lines 31-44). Regarding claim 19, the combination of Odinak and Jolliff teaches wherein the call center server is further configured to pause the conversation if it detects that the agent needs additional time to answer a question (reads on a pause session is usually required due to the length of time required to complete the service. The agent can initiate a session restart once the service has been completed, see Odinak, col. 2, lines 11-14). Regarding claim 20, the combination of Odinak and Jolliff teaches wherein the call center server is further configured to generate typical speech-related nuances when additional time to answer the question is detected (reads on pre-recorded “canned” sound bites are stored for efficient playback. These sound bites provide informational and navigational messages to all callers, see Odinak Fig.3 A and col. 10, lines 16-20 also line 50-66). Conclusion 4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rasha S. AL-Aubaidi whose telephone number is (571) 272-7481. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 am to 5:30 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ahmad Matar, can be reached on (571) 272-7488. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). /RASHA S AL AUBAIDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 08, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 04, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 20, 2026
Interview Requested
Jan 26, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 28, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 18, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593179
System and Method for Efficiency Among Devices
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581225
CHARGING BOX FOR EARPHONES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576367
POLYETHYLENE MEMBRANE ACOUSTIC ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563147
Shared Speakerphone System for Multiple Devices in a Conference Room
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563330
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+11.1%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 744 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month