FINAL DETAILED ACTION
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 filed 12-1-2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims 9-12 define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims 9-12 patentably distinguishes them from the references.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., allows the calling terminal to initiate a simultaneous interpretation request during the call) are not recited in the rejected claim(s) 1-20. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues that the prior art of Gupta does not teach or disclose the feature of ‘receiving a simultaneous interpretation request that is initiated by a terminal through the data channel’ and the newly added claim limitations: ‘sending a voice media stream for a simultaneous interpretation through the new media channel; receiving a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service through the data channel; and sending the received processing result of the simultaneous interpretation service to the terminal’. Examiner disagrees and further clarifies in the rejection(s) below how Gupta discloses the claimed invention.
Gupta clearly discloses the claimed limitations in the independent claims:
establishing a data channel after receiving a call request (i.e. the calling user may initiate a video call through the IMS network) (paragraphs: 0033, 0041-0042);
receiving a simultaneous interpretation request (i.e. user details comprising registration information; paragraph: 0043) that is initiated by a terminal (i.e. IP communication device of calling user or User Equipment; Fig. 1, 102; paragraphs: 0039, 0063) through the data channel (paragraphs: 0041, 0046);
anchoring call media (i.e. INVITE request prompting a media-register (MR) request) to a new media channel (i.e. set up a connection to a media server) (paragraphs: 0049-0051);
sending a voice media stream (i.e. video data sent by the called user for the calling user is first received by the media server) for simultaneous interpretation through the new media channel (paragraph: 0052);
receiving a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service through the data channel (i.e. the media server may process the video data to insert subtitles and may in turn stream it to the calling user) (paragraph: 0052); and
sending the received processing result of the simultaneous interpretation service to the terminal (i.e. subtitle supported video may include captions displayed on the screen of the calling user to transcribe the audio of the dialogue in the video call) (paragraphs: 0033, 0052).
It is not clear in the claims what ‘simultaneous interpretation’, ‘simultaneous interpretation service’, and ‘a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service’ means in regards to a call procedure or call request.
In conclusion, the prior art teaches the claimed invention in claims 1-20.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-8 are objected to because of the following informalities: It is not clear what the limitation ‘simultaneous interpretation’ means in line 1 of claim 1. There is no definition as to what ‘simultaneous interpretation’ means in a call procedure. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1-8 and 13-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: It is not clear what the limitation ‘simultaneous interpretation request’ means in line 4 of claim 1 and line 4 of claim 13. There is no definition as to what ‘simultaneous interpretation request’ means that is initiated by a terminal. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-8 and 13-20 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.
Claim 1 discloses the claimed limitations: ‘…sending a voice media stream for a simultaneous interpretation through the new media channel; receiving a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service through the data channel; and sending the received processing result of the simultaneous interpretation service to the terminal…’. It is not clear in claim 1 what ‘simultaneous interpretation’, ‘simultaneous interpretation service’, and ‘a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service’ means in regards to a call procedure or call request. Appropriate action is required.
Claim 13 discloses the claimed limitations: ‘…send a voice media stream for a simultaneous interpretation through the new media channel; receive a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service through the data channel; and send the received processing result of the simultaneous interpretation service to the terminal…’. It is not clear in claim 13 what ‘simultaneous interpretation’, ‘simultaneous interpretation service’, and ‘a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service’ means in regards to a call request. Appropriate action is required.
Claims 2-8 depend on claim 1 and claims 14-20 depend on claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by EP Pat. No. 2,621,140 by Gupta (cited as prior art by Applicant in IDS filed on 2-12-2024).
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Gupta discloses:
a method for implementing simultaneous interpretation in a call procedure (paragraph: 0038), comprising:
a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer-executable instruction, wherein the computer-executable instruction is configured to (paragraph: 0127):
establishing a data channel after receiving a call request (i.e. the calling user may initiate a video call through the IMS network) (paragraphs: 0033, 0041-0042);
receiving a simultaneous interpretation request (i.e. user details comprising registration information; paragraph: 0043) that is initiated by a terminal (i.e. IP communication device of calling user or User Equipment; Fig. 1, 102; paragraphs: 0039, 0063) through the data channel (paragraphs: 0041, 0046);
anchoring call media (i.e. INVITE request prompting a media-register (MR) request) to a new media channel (i.e. set up a connection to a media server) (paragraphs: 0049-0051);
sending a voice media stream (i.e. video data sent by the called user for the calling user is first received by the media server) for simultaneous interpretation through the new media channel (paragraph: 0052);
receiving a processing result of a simultaneous interpretation service through the data channel (i.e. the media server may process the video data to insert subtitles and may in turn stream it to the calling user) (paragraph: 0052); and
sending the received processing result of the simultaneous interpretation service to the terminal (i.e. subtitle supported video may include captions displayed on the screen of the calling user to transcribe the audio of the dialogue in the video call) (paragraphs: 0033, 0052).
Regarding claims 2 and 14, Gupta further comprises, before establishing the data channel based on the received call request: subscribing a call status of the terminal (paragraphs: 0038-0039, 0041, 0043).
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Gupta discloses wherein establishing the data channel based on the received call request comprises:
receiving a call request from the terminal (paragraphs: 0041-0042);
performing a reporting operation of a call status of the terminal (paragraphs: 0043-0044); and
responding to the call status of the terminal and establishing the data channel (paragraphs: 0045-0046).
Regarding claims 4 and 16, Gupta discloses wherein anchoring the call media to the new media channel comprises:
requesting a media resource and establishing the new media channel; and
executing an anchoring operation to anchor the call media to the media channel (paragraphs: 0049-0053).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Gupta discloses wherein executing the simultaneous interpretation service comprises:
performing voice recognition on a received voice media stream; and
translating the voice media stream after the voice recognition into a target language (paragraphs: 0068-0069, 0120-0124).
Regarding claims 6 and 18, Gupta discloses wherein translating the voice media stream after the voice recognition into the target language comprises:
receiving language information from the terminal; and
translating the voice media stream based on the language information (paragraphs: 0068-0069, 0120-0124).
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Gupta discloses further comprising displaying, on the terminal, the processing result of the simultaneous interpretation service (paragraphs: 0116-0018).
Regarding claims 8 and 20, Gupta discloses wherein the processing result of the simultaneous interpretation service is displayed in a form of subtitles (paragraph: 0048, 0116).
Regarding claim 9, Gupta discloses a system for implementing simultaneous interpretation in a call procedure (paragraph: 0038), comprising an access control entity (i.e. IMS network), a call application server (i.e. S-CSCF), a service application server (i.e. P-CSCF), a media resource server and an application entity (i.e. media server);
wherein the access control entity is configured to respectively establish channels with a terminal and the media resource server (paragraphs: 0063-0066);
the call application server is respectively interfaced with the service application server (paragraph: 0073),
the media resource server and the application entity (paragraph: 0137);
the service application server is configured to perform signaling interaction with the call application server and the application entity (paragraph: 0073), and
the service application server is configured to perform data transmission with the media resource server and the application entity (paragraph: 0073); and
the media resource server is interfaced with the application entity (i.e. media server) and configured to forward application data (paragraph: 0137).
Regarding claim 10, Gupta discloses the system according to claim 9, wherein the call application server (i.e. S-CSCF) is configured to provide management of audio and video calls and a data channel call, opening to public of a communication capability, and management on the media resource server (paragraphs: 0066, 0128-0129).
Regarding claim 11, Gupta discloses the system according to claim 9, wherein a media service provided by the media resource server comprises:
media capability management, data channel management and application data forwarding (paragraph: 0137).
Regarding claim 12, Gupta discloses the system according to claim 9, wherein the application entity (i.e. media server) performs control over a session, and the control comprises but is not limited to:
modifying a media path of the session (paragraph: 0137).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 Form.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300 (for formal communications intended for entry)
Or call:
(571) 272-2600 (for customer service assistance)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA HASHEM whose telephone number is 571-272-7542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday and Thursday 10 a.m. - 7 p.m. EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn Edwards can be reached on 571-270-7136.
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).
/LISA HASHEM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692