DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the Amendments and Arguments filed on/of 03/30/2026.
Claim(s) 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
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
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/30/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/13/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Final Office Action on 12/03/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments and Amendments
Amendments to the claims by the Applicant have been considered and addressed below.
With respect to the 35 USC § 101 and 103 rejections, the Applicant provides several arguments in which the Examiner will respond accordingly, below.
35 USC § 103 rejection(s)
Arguments in pages 11-13 of the Remarks filed on 03/30/2026.
Examiner’s Response to Arguments:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 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.
Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Gaither et al. (US 20170192948 A1) further in view of Follis et al. (US 20150127348 A1) and Graubart et al. (US 7606768 B2).
For more details, please refer to updated 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections for claims 1, 8, and 15, below.
35 USC § 101 rejection(s)
Arguments in pages 14-19 of the Remarks filed on 03/30/2026.
Examiner’s Response to Arguments:
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the rejection(s) of independent claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 101 rejections of claims 1-20 have been withdrawn.
Additionally, the Examiner notes that the specification provides clear support of the improvement when not reading the claim in a vacuum. The claim, read in light of the specification, recites a concrete, machine‑implemented pipeline that meaningfully improves electronic signing technology rather than merely executing an abstract human activity on a computer. The specification explains that the system programmatically identifies signable and information fields and generates field‑specific, context‑aware text prompts and presents those precise field prompt audio files to client devices for playback (see ¶ [0048] and [0058]), captures the user’s audible response, and then subjects that response to automated verification including content‑detection and optional biometric voice (not specified in the claim, but implied) matching to authenticate the clip. The authenticated audio clip is not merely stored as raw data but is cryptographically bound to the document state. The specification discloses hashing and third‑party verification and embedding the authenticated audio into the document metadata so that the resulting signed digital document is tamper‑evident and verifiable (see ¶ [0066]). These limitations describe particular data transformations that improved accuracy over bounded freehand input, accessibility for users with visual impairments, and stronger verifiability/tamper‑evidence compared to prior systems (¶ [0001-0003 and 0066]).
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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, 3-8, 10-15, and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaither et al. (US 20170192948 A1) further in view of Follis et al. (US 20150127348 A1) and Graubart et al. (US 7606768 B2).
As to independent claim 1, Gaither et al. teaches:
1. A method (see ¶ [0015]: “... Specifically, disclosed are methods, systems, and computer readable media that embody techniques for reformulating an electronic form into a set of input requests corresponding to fields of the form…”) comprising:
identifying, within a digital document, an information field and a signable field using a field recognition model (see ¶ [0016]: “To illustrate, consider an example of a medical electronic form. In this example, the electronic form includes different fields such as ones for a first name, a last name, a Social Security number, a date of birth, known prior health conditions, and a signature. In existing systems, such a form is displayed at a graphical user interface of a computing device to collect user input to each field. In comparison, the techniques disclosed herein reformulate the electronic form such that fields of the electronic form are presented one at a time in interactive and guided manner. Different input/output modalities for the presentation can be used including, for instance, an interactive audio presentation at the computing device. As such, the form filling engine asks the user one question at a time using a speaker of the computing device, where each question corresponds to a field. A user response via a microphone of the computing device is used by the form filling engine to populate the corresponding field. Accordingly, the user is asked about his or her first name, last name, Social Security number, and date of birth. In addition, the user is asked about his or her known prior health condition. If none, the form filling engine reads a signature disclaimer to the user and asks the user to sign the electronic form. However, if a prior health condition exists, then prior to signing the electronic form, the form filling engine reads a list of potential health conditions to the user letting the user select a number of these conditions and/or to add other health conditions. Further, if any of the information is already known, the form filling engine reads that information to the user for his or her confirmation thereby saving effort in filling out the medical electronic form.”);
generating a first text prompt corresponding to the information field and a second text prompt corresponding to the signable field (see ¶ [0016] citation as in limitations above, more specifically: “…Different input/output modalities for the presentation can be used including, for instance, an interactive audio presentation at the computing device. As such, the form filling engine asks the user one question at a time using a speaker of the computing device, where each question corresponds to a field. A user response via a microphone of the computing device is used by the form filling engine to populate the corresponding field. Accordingly, the user is asked about his or her first name, last name, Social Security number, and date of birth. In addition, the user is asked about his or her known prior health condition. If none, the form filling engine reads a signature disclaimer to the user and asks the user to sign the electronic form. However, if a prior health condition exists, then prior to signing the electronic form, the form filling engine reads a list of potential health conditions to the user letting the user select a number of these conditions and/or to add other health conditions. Further, if any of the information is already known, the form filling engine reads that information to the user for his or her confirmation thereby saving effort in filling out the medical electronic form.” and further, see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0036]: “Turning to FIG. 2, the figure illustrates a guided presentation displayed at a client to fill out an electronic form. As displayed, the guided presentation includes input requests to solicit user responses. A user inputs the user responses to the guided presentation at the client 110. The displayed input requests and inputted user responses represent a guided dialog. In the interest of clarity of explanation, a form presentation tool is described in connection with facilitating the guided dialog at a user interface of the client. The user interface implements a input/output modality in the form of a text messenger. However, other computing components and input/output modalities can be additionally, or alternatively, used…”);
providing the first text prompt and the second text prompt to (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0021]: “… In another illustration, if the user has a physical or manual impairment, the form filling engine uses an audio for the one-at-a-time presentation and accepts vocal use responses, thereby avoiding the need of the user to view the electronic form and type in data in the fields.” and ¶ [0033]: “…The user interface 114 represents an interface for presenting the guided presentation and receiving the user responses according to one or more input/output modalities. The user interface 114 includes, for example, a graphical user interface for displaying the guided presentation and a hard or soft keyboard for receiving typed user responses. Additionally, or alternatively, the user interface 114 includes an audio interface for providing an audio presentation receiving speech responses.”);
providing the first field prompt audio file corresponding to the information field for audible presentation by a client device (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021 and 0033] citations as in limitations above.);
generating information text to add to the information field within the digital document based on receiving, from the client device, a first audio response to the first field prompt audio file (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021 and 0033] citations as in limitations above. More specifically ¶ [0033]: “…Additionally, or alternatively, the user interface 114 includes an audio interface for providing an audio presentation receiving speech responses.” and further ¶ [0035]: “Hence, the components of the server 120 allows the dynamic processing of an electronic form of any structure and from any source to generate a reformulated electronic form. The reformulated electronic form includes a set of input requests mapped to a state machine. The input request and the state machine allows a guided presentation about the fields of the electronic form at the client 110. User responses are then used to populate the fields of the electronic form.”);
providing the second field prompt audio file for audible presentation by the client device (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021 and 0033] citations as in limitations above. More specifically ¶ [0016]: “…In addition, the user is asked about his or her known prior health condition. If none, the form filling engine reads a signature disclaimer to the user and asks the user to sign the electronic form...”, further ¶ [0041-0042]: “[0041] …The guided presentation proceeds to the last field. This last field is a signature field and is associated with a legal disclaimer. [0042] As a part 280 of the guided presentation, the form presentation tool reads the legal disclaimer and asks the user to enter his or her name as a form of the signature. The entered name is used to populate this last field. The electronic form is then automatically saved to complete the fill-out process.” and ¶ [0048]: “…If a field is a signature field, the input request describes any disclaimer, asks the user to type in a name, to say a name, or to use a biometric signature (e.g. a finger print, a retinal scan, a face recognition).”);
receiving a second audio response to the second field prompt audio file from the client device, the second audio response comprising audible approval for signing the signable field within the digital document (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021, 0033, 0041-0042 and 0048] citations as in limitations above. More specifically: ¶ [0033]: “Turning to the computing components of the client 110, these components include, for example, a form presentation tool 112 and a user interface 114. In an example, the form presentation tool 112 represents an interface to the form filling engine 122 of the server 120. […] Additionally, or alternatively, the user interface 114 includes an audio interface for providing an audio presentation receiving speech responses.” and
¶ [0048]: “…If a field is a signature field, the input request describes any disclaimer, asks the user to type in a name, to say a name, or to use a biometric signature (e.g. a finger print, a retinal scan, a face recognition).”)
generating, from the second audio response, an audio signature (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021, 0033, 0041-0042 and 0048] citations as in limitation above and further ¶ [0042]: “As a part 280 of the guided presentation, the form presentation tool reads the legal disclaimer and asks the user to enter his or her name as a form of the signature. The entered name is used to populate this last field. The electronic form is then automatically saved to complete the fill-out process.”. and ¶ [0048]: “…If a field is a signature field, the input request describes any disclaimer, asks the user to type in a name, to say a name, or to use a biometric signature (e.g. a finger print, a retinal scan, a face recognition).”); and
generating a signed digital document by applying the audio signature (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021, 0033, 0041-0042 and 0048] citations as in limitation above and further ¶ [0042]: “As a part 280 of the guided presentation, the form presentation tool reads the legal disclaimer and asks the user to enter his or her name as a form of the signature. The entered name is used to populate this last field. The electronic form is then automatically saved to complete the fill-out process.”. and ¶ [0048]: “…If a field is a signature field, the input request describes any disclaimer, asks the user to type in a name, to say a name, or to use a biometric signature (e.g. a finger print, a retinal scan, a face recognition).”)
However, Gaither et al. does not explicitly teach, but Follis does teach:
providing the first text prompt and the second text prompt to a text-to-speech engine to generate a first field prompt audio file corresponding to the information field and a second field prompt audio file corresponding to the signable field (i.e., information and signable fields as taught by Gaither et al., above) (see Follis ¶ [0024]: “Certain embodiments of the system illustrated in FIG. 1A may include supplementary resources and services, such as networked document repository 500 and transcription services 600. For example, the documents managed using the various systems disclosed herein can be stored in a dedicated networked document repository 500, thus advantageously allowing such documents to be accessed by a wide variety of document originators 100 and/or document recipients 200 without regard to whether other components of the system are available at any given time. However in other embodiments documents may be retained in storage that is local to electronic signature server 300, such as provided by memory 320, or in storage that is local to document originator 100 or document recipient 200. Transcription services 600 may include a text-to-speech module 610 and/or a speech-to-text module 620, which can be used to generate an audio version of a document or transcribe a spoken response received from a document recipient 200, respectively. Providing such services by networked resources advantageously eliminates any need for such services to be provided locally at the document originator's device 110 or at the document recipient's device 210. This allows document originators 100 and document recipients 200 to leverage the functionality provided by electronic signature server 300 without the need to obtain specialized hardware or software, thereby providing networked functionality to users of devices having limited processing capability, such as public kiosks, smartphones, and tablet computers. Thus in certain embodiments transcription services 600 may be integrated into and provided by electronic signature server 300.”
¶ [0028]: “The functionalities disclosed herein can optionally be incorporated into other software applications, such as document management systems or document viewers. For example, an application configured to view portable document format (PDF) files can be configured to implement certain of the functionalities disclosed herein upon detecting the presence of signature fields or other metadata in a given document, including signature fields intended for a handwritten signature…”
¶ [0032-0033]: “[0032] …Where no audio recording is available, text-to-speech module 610 can be used to generate an audio recording of the document terms (see reference numeral 10b' in FIG. 1B). While the determination with respect to the audio recording can be made by document recipient 200 in certain embodiments, it will be appreciated that such a determination may be made by other components in other embodiments. [0033] For example, in a modified embodiment electronic signature server 300 is configured to detect the absence of an audio component and, in response to such detection, can be further configured to (a) prompt document originator 100 to record an appropriate audio component, and/or (b) automatically generate an audio component by leveraging functionality provided by text-to-speech module 610...”
¶ [0051]: “…In some cases the system further comprises a transcription services module configured to generate the audio recording based on text-to-speech processing of the document. …”);
generating, from the second audio response, an audio signature comprising an authenticated audio clip for approving signature of the signable field within the digital document (see ¶ [0011, 0020, 0024, 0028, and 0051] citations as in limitations above: [0020]: “…Specifically, a spoken phrase by the recipient, such as "I agree to these terms," can be recorded, digitized and incorporated into and stored together with the received document…” and further ¶ [0025]: “Another example of supplementary services provided in certain embodiments are authentication services 700. Authentication services 700 can be configured to authenticate document originators 100 and/or document recipients 200 before providing access to resources associated with electronic signature server 300, before accepting an electronic signature, or before enabling other functionalities…” and ¶ [0020]: “…Regardless of whether the document recipient 200 responds with a prerecorded response or otherwise, the audio response can be incorporated into and stored together with the received document. The resulting modified document can be further processed according to a pre-established workflow.”);
Gaither et al. and Follis are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing associated with prompting a user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al. to incorporate the teachings of Follis of providing the first text prompt and the second text prompt to a text-to-speech engine to generate a first field prompt audio file corresponding to the information field and a second field prompt audio file corresponding to the signable field and generating, from the second audio response, an audio signature comprising an authenticated audio clip approving signature of the signable field within the digital document which provides the benefit of allowing recipients to receive, understand, and interact with a document using, for example, conventional components such as the microphone and speaker provided by a telephone (¶ [0011] of Follis).
However, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis does not explicitly teach, but Graubart et al. does teach:
computing, via a hashing algorithm, a hash of the authenticated audio clip of the audio signature (see ¶ col. 1, line 57 – col. 2, line 24: “(7) The voice signature method according to the invention allows a signer to electronically sign a document. The method includes the signer obtaining a public key from an intended recipient of the document to be electronically signed. The signer speaks a personal identification number (PIN) provided by the software to generate a voice PIN. The signer then speaks at least the signer's name to generate a voice signature. The voice PIN and voice signature are then appended to the document and the voice PIN is encrypted using the public key to create an encrypted voice PIN. A polynomial hash based on the document, the voice signature and the encrypted voice PIN is generated, and this hash is encrypted based on the PIN to generate an encrypted hash. Finally, the document, the voice signature, the encrypted voice PIN and the encrypted hash are sent to the intended recipient. (8) In a preferred embodiment, the signer speaks temporal information such as date and time in addition to the signer's name. The signer may also speak information included in the document. The public key and PIN may be provided by software or the public key may be downloaded from the intended recipient by the signer. The present method may be used with documents such as, for example, tax forms, purchase agreements, licensing agreements and other commercial agreements. A particularly preferred application is with respect to electronic tax filings. (9) The present invention capitalizes on the use of asymmetric encryption for binding a signature to a document (use of an encrypted hash) without requiring that each signer have his or her own private key. The binding of the signature to the document is strong, just as in traditional PKI. However, in PKI, the signature and the binding are done by the same mechanism: the private key encrypted hash. As noted above, such private key must be securely distributed to the signer in advance of signing, and the signer must ensure that the private key is not ever in the possession of any third party.”, and
Claim 1: “1. A method for electronically signing a document, comprising: by a first computing device, electronically obtaining a public key; receiving a spoken personal identification number (PIN) and generating a voice PIN from the spoken PIN; receiving a spoken intention to execute a document and generating a voice signature from the spoken intention to execute; encrypting the voice PIN using the public key; generating a polynomial hash based on the document, the voice signature and the encrypted voice PIN, wherein the polynomial hash varies with changes in at least the voice signature and the encrypted voice PIN; encrypting the hash using the PIN as an input to said encryption of the hash; and sending the document, the voice signature, the encrypted voice PIN, and the encrypted hash to a second computing device, the second computing device being of an intended recipient of the document, whereby the encrypted voice PIN is provided to the second computing device to allow, by the second computing device, i) generation, using the PIN resulting from a decryption of the encrypted voice PIN, of a comparative encrypted hash of the document, the voice signature, and the encrypted voice PIN for comparison with the encrypted hash, and ii) comparison of the voice of the voice PIN to the voice of the voice signature, such that no previously stored authentication data is necessary at the location of authentication.”);
generating a signed digital document by applying the audio signature and the hash to the digital document (see ¶ col. 1, line 57 – col. 2, line 24 and Claim 1 as in limitation above and further Fig. 5 and 6 (form, voice PIN and hash)
and ¶ col. 3, lines 14-54: “…(14) As illustrated in FIG. 5, a hash is generated based on the tax form, the voice signature, and the encrypted voice PIN. The hash is used to bind all of this information together. The hash thus ensures that any change to the tax form signature or voice PIN can be detected. (15) As shown in FIG. 6, this hash is then encrypted based on the unencrypted PIN (the actual PIN is used such as, for example, the digits 5678, not the utterance of the PIN recorded earlier). In order for the encryption of the hash to be suitably robust, the PIN should be of sufficient length to provide the desired level of security. Encrypting the hash with the secret PIN prevents others from modifying data and/or hash without detection. That is, this encryption is done to prevent a man-in-the-middle attack whereby someone replaces the tax form with an alternate tax form, appending the genuine voice signature and encrypted voice PIN and then tries to provide a newly calculated encrypted hash. Because the voice PIN is dictated in the signer's voice and subsequently encrypted an attacker will be unable to encrypt successfully any replacement hash with the correct key. (16) At this point, the tax form, associated voice signature, encrypted voice PIN and encrypted hash is sent from the taxpayer computer 12 to the IRS server 14 for filing, or to other parties if additional signatures are needed. Optionally, to facilitate data transmission and/or storage the information may be compressed before it is sent.”).
PNG
media_image1.png
480
320
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gaither et al., Follis, and Graubart et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing associated with electronic signatures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al. in combination with Gaither et al. to incorporate the teachings of Graubart et al. of computing, via a hashing algorithm, a hash of the authenticated audio clip of the audio signature; and generating a signed digital document by applying the audio signature and the hash to the digital document which provides the benefit of being able to verify that once a signature has been bound to a document neither the document nor the signature can be modified without detection and wherein the effort required to protect the signature from theft is greatly reduced (¶ col. 2, lines 25-37 of Graubart et al.).
As to independent claim 8, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1 above.
Gaither et al. further teaches:
8. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by at least one processor (see ¶ [0090-0091]: “[0090] The computing system 800 includes at least a processor 802, a memory 804, a storage device 806, input/output peripherals 808, communication peripherals 810, and an interface bus 812… [0091] Further, the memory 804 includes an operating system, programs, and applications. The processor 802 is configured to execute the stored instructions and includes, for example, a logical processing unit, a microprocessor, a digital signal processor, and other processors. The memory 804 and/or the processor 802 can be virtualized and can be hosted within another computing system of, for example, a cloud network or a datacenter…”), cause a computer system to:
[perform the limitations taught by Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. as in claim 1, above].
As to independent claim 15, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1 above.
Gaither et al. further teaches:
15. A system (see ¶ [0090-0091]: “[0090] The computing system 800 includes at least a processor 802, a memory 804, a storage device 806, input/output peripherals 808, communication peripherals 810, and an interface bus 812… [0091] Further, the memory 804 includes an operating system, programs, and applications. The processor 802 is configured to execute the stored instructions and includes, for example, a logical processing unit, a microprocessor, a digital signal processor, and other processors. The memory 804 and/or the processor 802 can be virtualized and can be hosted within another computing system of, for example, a cloud network or a datacenter. ”) comprising:
at least one processor (see ¶ [0090] citation as in citations, above.); and
at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions (see ¶ [0090-0091] citations as in citations, above.) that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the system to:
[perform the limitations taught by Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. as in claim 1, above].
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1 and 8, above.
Follis further teaches:
3, 10, and 17. The method/ non-transitory computer-readable medium/system of claims 1, 8, and 15. The method of claim 1,
further comprising:
providing a second client device with the digital document containing the audio signature (see Fig. 2 (Transmitted Document 50 and Returned Document 50’) and ¶ [0011]: “…The electronic signature server can be used by a large number of document originators and recipients using a variety of devices having various capabilities, including devices such as public kiosks, smartphones, and tablet computers. Numerous configurations and variations of such embodiments will be apparent in light of this disclosure.”, and ¶ [0043]: “While the example embodiments illustrated in FIGS. 1A and 1B and described above represent one set of implementations, it will be appreciated that a wide variety of alternative embodiments may be implemented as well. For example, FIG. 3A is a block diagram illustrating selected components of a system that allows users of a shared device to record an agreed-upon document. In particular, FIG. 3A illustrates that document originator 100 and document recipient 200 can use a shared device 150 having a microphone 152 to record both the document terms and the recipient's response to such terms. The recipient's response may comprise an electronic signature, such as an audio recording of recipient 200 saying, for example, "I agree to the foregoing terms.". It will be appreciated that in certain embodiments originator 100 and recipient 200 may be physically present together at the same shared device, such as when the two parties have their voice recorded by, for example, a smartphone that is connected to electronic signature server 300. However in other embodiments originator 100 and recipient 200 may be physically separated, but may nevertheless be connected with each other, and with electronic signature server 300, via a PSTN for example. In this case electronic signature server 300 can still be configured to record both the document terms as read by originator 100 and the response as spoken by recipient 200. In this case shared device 150 comprises two or more devices (such as two telephones) connected by a network (such as a PSTN).”));
receiving the digital document with a non-audio digital signature the non-audio digital signature being created by a user interaction with a graphical user interface of the second client device (see Fig. 2 (Transmitted Document 50 and Returned Document 50’) and ¶ [0011 and 0043] citations as in limitation above and further ¶ [0022]: “In certain embodiments electronic signature server 300 includes an interactivity module 350 configured to provide an interface to users accessing the workflows and resources managed by electronic signature server 300. Such an interface may be provided by way of a graphical user interface rendered on a digital display, although other types of interfaces, such as voice response, touch-tone, or textual interfaces, can be implemented as well. The user interfaces can be provided to one or more document originators 100 and/or one or more document recipients 200. For example, in one embodiment interactivity module 350 is configured to generate a graphical user interface capable of receiving commands, parameters, and/or other metadata that define a workflow from document originator 100. Such parameters may specify, for example, how a particular document is to be routed amongst one or more document recipients 200 and how electronic signature server 300 should respond to various interactions between a particular document recipient 200 and the particular document. Likewise, interactivity module 350 can also be configured to generate a user interface capable of guiding a document recipient 200 through the process of receiving, reviewing, electronically signing (or declining to electronically sign), and/or otherwise interacting with a document…”,
¶ [0037]: “For instance, electronic signature server 300 can be configured to analyze the recipient's response and determine whether it sufficiently corresponds to a designated statement indicating assent to the document terms. Specifically, interactivity module 350 can instruct, via voice prompt, document recipient 200 to make a designated statement such as "I agree to the terms of this document," to electronically sign a received document. Where the recipient's response sufficiently corresponds to the designated statement, the statement itself can be considered an electronic signature. Where the recipient's response does not correspond to the designated statement, it can be analyzed to determine whether it corresponds to other spoken commands recognized by interactivity module 350. In an alternative embodiment, document recipient 200 may annotate the received document, either in addition to or instead of electronically signing the document. Such annotation may be transcribed, for example, by leveraging functionality provided by speech-to-text module 620. Analyzing the recipient's response using resources provided by electronic signature server 300 and/or transcription services 600 advantageously eliminates any need for document recipient 200 to have a device capable of providing such functionality. This allows document recipient 200 to obtain such functionality using a traditional telephone, a public kiosk, or other device with limited audio processing capacity or software.”, and ¶ [0041]: “Still referring to FIG. 2, after document recipient 200 receives transmitted document 50, a retuned document 50' is generated. Returned document 50' includes textual version 52, and optionally audio recording 54 of the document terms. Returned document 50' optionally includes an audio recording of the recipients' response 56. Recipient's response 56 may comprise an electronic signature where recipient 200 has assented to the document terms, but may alternatively include other comments where no such assent has occurred. In some embodiments, where recipient neither signs nor comments on the transmitted document 50, response 56 may be omitted...”.); and
generating an updated digital document containing the audio signature and the non-audio digital signature (see Fig. 2 (Transmitted Document 50 and Returned Document 50’) and ¶ [0011, 0037, 0041, and 0043] citations as in limitation above. More specifically, ¶ [0041]: “… As illustrated in FIG. 2, returned document 50' may be routed back to document originator 100 in certain embodiments, for example to allow originator 100 to review the recipient's response 56. However in other embodiments returned document 50' may be further processed by electronic signature server 300 according to an established workflow process.”).
Gaither et al., Follis and Graubart et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing associated with electronic signatures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al. in combination with Follis and Graubart et al. to further incorporate the teachings of Follis of providing a second client device with the digital document containing the audio signature; receiving the digital document with a non-audio digital signature the non-audio digital signature being created by a user interaction with the second client device; and generating an updated digital document containing the audio signature and the non-audio digital signature which provides the benefit of allowing recipients to receive, understand, and interact with a document using, for example, conventional components such as the microphone and speaker provided by a telephone (¶ [0011] of Follis).
Regarding claims 4 and 11, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1 and 8, above.
Follis further teaches:
4 and 11. The method/ non-transitory computer-readable medium of claims 1 and 8,
further comprising embedding the authenticated audio clip for approving the signature into the signed digital document (see ¶ [0011]: “…The electronic signature server can record the recipient's electronic signature and incorporate it into the document, such that it forms part of the electronic document just as a traditional handwritten signature forms part of a signed paper document…” and ¶ [0020]: “…Specifically, a spoken phrase by the recipient, such as "I agree to these terms," can be recorded, digitized and incorporated into and stored together with the received document… Regardless of whether the document recipient 200 responds with a prerecorded response or otherwise, the audio response can be incorporated into and stored together with the received document. The resulting modified document can be further processed according to a pre-established workflow.”).
Gaither et al., Follis and Graubart et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing associated with electronic signatures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al. in combination with Follis and Graubart et al. to further incorporate the teachings of Follis of further comprising embedding the authenticated audio clip approving the signature into the signed digital document which provides the benefit of allowing recipients to receive, understand, and interact with a document using, for example, conventional components such as the microphone and speaker provided by a telephone (¶ [0011] of Follis).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 18, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1, 8, and 15, above.
Follis further teaches:
5, 12, and 18. The method/non-transitory computer-readable medium/system of claims 1, 8, and 15, further comprising:
identifying biometric data corresponding to a user account associated with the audio signature (see ¶ [0011, 0020, and 0024-0025] citations as in claim 1, above and further ¶ [0025]: “… Authentication can be provided by any appropriate existing or subsequently-developed authentication scheme. For example, in certain embodiments document recipient 200 can be required to provide a password, public key, private key, or other authentication token before being authorized to apply an electronic signature to, or otherwise respond to, a received document. In other embodiments the authentication token provided by document recipient 200 takes the form of a voiceprint extracted from a spoken electronic signature itself. If the extracted voiceprint matches or substantially matches a voiceprint saved in a voiceprint repository 710, then the electronic signature can be considered to be authentic. The voiceprints can be considered to be substantially matching where there exists a reasonably high likelihood that the voiceprints where generated by the same person. The voiceprint saved in voiceprint repository 710 can be provided as part of an initial registration process completed by document recipient 200…”); and
authenticating the second audio response utilizing the biometric data (see ¶ [0011, 0020, and 0024-0025] citations as in claim 1 and the limitation above. “… In other embodiments the authentication token provided by document recipient 200 takes the form of a voiceprint extracted from a spoken electronic signature itself. If the extracted voiceprint matches or substantially matches a voiceprint saved in a voiceprint repository 710, then the electronic signature can be considered to be authentic…”).
Gaither et al., Follis and Graubart et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing associated with electronic signatures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al. in combination with Follis and Graubart et al. to further incorporate the teachings of Follis of identifying biometric data corresponding to a user account associated with the audio signature and authenticating the audio response utilizing the biometric data which provides the benefit of allowing recipients to receive, understand, and interact with a document using, for example, conventional components such as the microphone and speaker provided by a telephone (¶ [0011] of Follis).
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 19, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1, 8, and 15, above.
Follis further teaches:
6, 13, and 19. The method/ non-transitory computer-readable medium/system of claims 1, 8, and 15 further comprising:
in response to generating the signed digital document, providing the signed digital document to an additional client device (see Fig. 2 (Transmitted Document 50 and Returned Document 50’) and ¶ [0011, 0037, 0041, and 0043] citations as in claims 3, 10 and, 17 above.);
receiving, from the additional client device, a non-verbal digital signature (see Fig. 2 (Transmitted Document 50 and Returned Document 50’) and ¶ [0011, 0037, 0041, and 0043] citations as in claims 3, 10 and, 17 above.); and
applying the non-verbal digital signature to the signed digital document (see Fig. 2 (Transmitted Document 50 and Returned Document 50’) and ¶ [0011, 0037, 0041, and 0043] citations as in claims 3, 10 and, 17 above. More specifically, ¶ [0041]: “… As illustrated in FIG. 2, returned document 50' may be routed back to document originator 100 in certain embodiments, for example to allow originator 100 to review the recipient's response 56. However in other embodiments returned document 50' may be further processed by electronic signature server 300 according to an established workflow process.”).
Gaither et al., Follis and Graubart et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing associated with electronic signatures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al. in combination with Follis and Graubart et al. to further incorporate the teachings of Follis of in response to generating the signed digital document, providing the signed digital document to an additional client device; receiving, from the additional client device, a non-verbal digital signature; and applying the non-verbal digital signature to the signed digital document which provides the benefit of allowing recipients to receive, understand, and interact with a document using, for example, conventional components such as the microphone and speaker provided by a telephone (¶ [0011] of Follis).
Regarding claim 7, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1, above.
Gaither et al. further teaches:
7, 14, and 20. The method/ non-transitory computer-readable medium/system of claims 1, 8, and 15,
wherein receiving the second audio response to the second field prompt audio file from the client device (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021, 0033, 0041-0042 and 0048] citations as in claim 1, above. More specifically:
¶ [0033]: “Turning to the computing components of the client 110, these components include, for example, a form presentation tool 112 and a user interface 114. In an example, the form presentation tool 112 represents an interface to the form filling engine 122 of the server 120. […] Additionally, or alternatively, the user interface 114 includes an audio interface for providing an audio presentation receiving speech responses.” and
¶ [0048]: “…If a field is a signature field, the input request describes any disclaimer, asks the user to type in a name, to say a name, or to use a biometric signature (e.g. a finger print, a retinal scan, a face recognition).”) comprises
receiving, based on a user interacting with the client device, the second audio response comprising the audible approval for signing the signable field within the digital document (see Fig. 2 (240: “What is your name?” for Name field of 220 and 280: “Please enter your name to create a voice signature. “By signing you certify that all of the information you provided is accurate.””) and ¶ [0016, 0021, 0033, 0041-0042 and 0048] citations as in claim 1 and limitation above and further More specifically:
¶ [0033]: “Turning to the computing components of the client 110, these components include, for example, a form presentation tool 112 and a user interface 114. In an example, the form presentation tool 112 represents an interface to the form filling engine 122 of the server 120. […] Additionally, or alternatively, the user interface 114 includes an audio interface for providing an audio presentation receiving speech responses.”,
¶ [0042]: “As a part 280 of the guided presentation, the form presentation tool reads the legal disclaimer and asks the user to enter his or her name as a form of the signature. The entered name is used to populate this last field. The electronic form is then automatically saved to complete the fill-out process.”. and
¶ [0048]: “…If a field is a signature field, the input request describes any disclaimer, asks the user to type in a name, to say a name, or to use a biometric signature (e.g. a finger print, a retinal scan, a face recognition).”).
Regarding claims 14, and 20, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1, 8, and 15, above.
Follis further teaches:
14, and 20. The method/ non-transitory computer-readable medium/system of claims 8, and 15,
wherein generating the signed digital document further comprises generating and applying an indication that the audio signature was received by voice to the signed digital document (Fig. 2 (Transmitted Document 50 and Returned Document 50’) and ¶ [0011, 0037, 0041, and 0043] citations as in limitation above. More specifically, ¶ [0041]: “Still referring to FIG. 2, after document recipient 200 receives transmitted document 50, a retuned document 50' is generated. Returned document 50' includes textual version 52, and optionally audio recording 54 of the document terms. Returned document 50' optionally includes an audio recording of the recipients' response 56. Recipient's response 56 may comprise an electronic signature where recipient 200 has assented to the document terms, but may alternatively include other comments where no such assent has occurred. In some embodiments, where recipient neither signs nor comments on the transmitted document 50, response 56 may be omitted. However, in such cases modified document metadata 58' may indicate that returned document 50' was provided to document recipient 200, but was left unsigned. Likewise, where document recipient 200 provides an electronic signature, modified document metadata 58' may indicate this status. As illustrated in FIG. 2, returned document 50' may be routed back to document originator 100 in certain embodiments, for example to allow originator 100 to review the recipient's response 56. However in other embodiments returned document 50' may be further processed by electronic signature server 300 according to an established workflow process.”).
Gaither et al., Follis and Graubart et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing associated with electronic signatures. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al. in combination with Follis and Graubart et al. to further incorporate the teachings of Follis of wherein generating the signed digital document further comprises generating and applying an indication that the audio signature was received by voice to the signed digital document which provides the benefit of allowing recipients to receive, understand, and interact with a document using, for example, conventional components such as the microphone and speaker provided by a telephone (¶ [0011] of Follis).
Claims 2, 9, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaither et al. (US 20170192948 A1) further in view of Follis et al. (US 20150127348 A1) and Graubart et al. (US 7606768 B2) as applied to claims 1, 8, and 15 above, and further in view of Wexler et al. (US 20210266681 A1).
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Gaither et al. in combination with Follis, and Graubart et al. teach the limitations as in claim 1, 8, and 15, above.
Gaither et al. further teaches:
2, 9, and 16. The method/ non-transitory computer-readable medium/system of claims 1, 8, and 15,
wherein generating the first field prompt audio file and the second field prompt file (see Fig. 2 and ¶ [0021 0033] citations as in claim 1, above) comprises:
However, Follis et al. does not explicitly teach, but Wexler et al. does teach:
providing the digital document to an optical character recognition engine to generate text (see ¶ [0238 and 0252]: “[0238] … In some situations, the information may be retrieved as text or image, and informational audio signal 2634 may be generated by text to speech conversion, or an image-to-text (OCR) conversion followed by a text to speech conversion. [0252] In step 2718, process 2700 may include generating and transmitting informational audio signal 2634 representative of the item of information to a hearing interface device during the informational time period. For example, when the item of information includes textual information, processor 210 may execute one or more text-to-speech conversion algorithms to generate informational audio signal 2634 representative of the textual information. In some embodiments, processor 210 may also execute one or more optical character recognition algorithms to recognize the textual content in the item of information. For example, if the item of information is the name of a street as identified in an image, processor 210 may execute one or more optical character recognition algorithms to identify the text representing the street name in the image. ...”); and
providing the text to a speech engine to generate the first field prompt audio file and the second field prompt audio file (see ¶ [0238, 0249-0250, and 0252]: “[0238] … In some situations, the information may be retrieved as text or image, and informational audio signal 2634 may be generated by text to speech conversion, or an image-to-text (OCR) conversion followed by a text to speech conversion. [0249] In step 2714, process 2700 may include identifying an item of information based on at least one of the received at least one image or the received at least one audio signal. In step 2714, process 2700 may include identifying a representation of at least one individual or at least one object in at least one of the plurality of images... [0250] In step 2714, process 2700 may additionally include identifying an item of information associated with the detected individual and/or object. For example, an item of information such as a name, age, social or other relationship with the user, address, profession, time or place of last interaction with the user, etc., associated with the identified individual may be determined… [0252] … Processor 210 may subsequently execute one or more text-to-speech conversion algorithms to convert the recognized textual content into informational audio signal 2634. In other embodiments, if the item of information includes audio retrieved, for example, from a database, processor 210 may generate the informational audio signal by playing the audio.”).
Gaither et al., Follis, Graubart et al. and Wexler et al. are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor in natural language processing (e.g., text processing). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaither et al., Follis and Graubart et al. to incorporate the teachings of Wexler et al. of providing the digital document to an optical character recognition engine to generate text; and providing the text to a speech engine to generate the field prompt audio file which provides the benefit of performing enhancements to improve the quality of the audio for the user ([0232] of Wexler et al.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brockhaus et al (US 20180131520 A1) – pertinent to claim 3 (signature replacement, ¶ [0045])
Craveiro Lopes (WO 2019022629 A1) – pertinent to claims 1, 8, and 15 (hash computing, ¶ [003 and 039])
Leoni et al. (EP 3316162 B1) – pertinent to claims 1, 8, and 15 (hash computing, ¶ [0015 and 0026-0027])
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Keisha Y Castillo-Torres whose telephone number is (571)272-3975. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 4:00 pm (EST).
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, Pierre-Louis Desir can be reached on (571)272-7799. 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.
Keisha Y. Castillo-Torres
Examiner
Art Unit 2659
/Keisha Y. Castillo-Torres/Examiner, Art Unit 2659
Prosecution Insights