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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is a first office action in response to application filed, with the above serial number, on 08 December 2023 in which claims 1-20 are presented for examination after canceling claims 21-50 via preliminary amendment. Claims 1-20 are therefore pending in the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 11/26/25 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 5, 11, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Johnson, III et al (hereinafter “Johnson”, 2023/0385778).
As per Claim 1, Johnson discloses a computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving an input to schedule a first virtual meeting, wherein the first virtual meeting is scheduled to include a first plurality of participants including a first participant associated with a first computing device of a first plurality of computing devices and a second participant associated with a second computing device of the first plurality of computing devices, the first and second computing devices being connected via a network to a server providing the first virtual meeting (at least paragraph 72; meeting intent is an intension to schedule a meeting in the future. The meeting may be a follow up to a current meeting. In addition to detecting the intention to meet, meeting parameters, such as participants, proposed meeting time and date, and meeting topic may be extracted);
receiving, prior to a start of the first virtual meeting, a particular document to be presented to the first plurality of participants during the first virtual meeting (at least paragraph 40; data sources 104a and 104b through 104n may store meeting content, such as files shared during the meeting, generated in response to a meeting (e.g., meeting notes or minutes), and/or shared in preparation for a meeting);
storing the particular document in a cloud storage associated with the first virtual meeting (at least paragraph 37, 40; Fig. 1-2; Storage 225; cloud computing environment; data source(s) 104a through 104n may be one or more of a database, a file, data structure, corpus, or other data store; par. 22 Content (e.g., meeting presentations, agendas, invites, notes, chats, transcripts) from related meeting may also be associated with a common identification, described herein as a meeting thread ID);
storing, at the cloud storage as first metadata associated with the particular document, first virtual meeting communication data captured via at least one of the first plurality of computing devices while the particular document is being presented at the first virtual meeting (at least Fig. 3; par. 74; receives a document 307 and/or the audio data 305; audio may be from a video conference, teleconference, or a recording of an in-person meeting; par. 49 meetings being monitored may be virtual meetings that occur via teleconference, video conference, virtual reality);
determining that a second virtual meeting is scheduled to occur during which the particular document is scheduled to be presented, the second virtual meeting including a second plurality of participants, wherein the second plurality of participants includes the first participant (at least paragraph 22, 27; Content (e.g., meeting presentations, agendas, invites, notes, chats, transcripts) from related meeting may also be associated with a common identification, described herein as a meeting thread ID. The association could be direct, such as by associating the thread ID as metadata to a content. The association could be indirect using an index, or other data store, that associates a content ID with a meeting thread ID; a meeting relationship is formed when a second meeting is described in content related to a first meeting. The content for the first meeting may be a transcript of utterances made in the first meeting. The content could also be meeting notes (e.g., minutes) for the first meeting. The description may be an expressed intent to conduct the second meeting. The second meeting may already be scheduled or yet to be scheduled);
storing, at the cloud storage as second metadata associated with the particular document, second virtual meeting communication data captured via at least one of the second plurality of computing devices while the particular document is being presented at the second virtual meeting (at least Fig. 3; par. 74; receives a document 307 and/or the audio data 305; audio may be from a video conference, teleconference, or a recording of an in-person meeting; par. 49: meetings being monitored may be virtual meetings that occur via teleconference, video conference, virtual reality); and
causing display, at the first computing device:
a first option to access, via the first metadata stored at the cloud storage, the first virtual meeting communication data captured while the particular document was presented during the first virtual meeting (at least Fig. 7; Par. 102-106, 21; meeting tree 720 may enable viewers to access meeting details by selecting one of the meeting visualizations. In this example, meeting details 709 are shown for meeting I 708. The meeting details include a meeting thread ID, meeting date, attendee list, link to a meeting transcript, link to meeting content); and
a second option to access, via the second metadata stored at the cloud storage, the second virtual meeting communication data captured while the particular document was presented during the second virtual meeting (at least Fig. 7; Par. 102-106, 21; meeting tree 720 may enable viewers to access meeting details by selecting one of the meeting visualizations. In this example, meeting details 709 are shown for meeting I 708. The meeting details include a meeting thread ID, meeting date, attendee list, link to a meeting transcript, link to meeting content).
As per Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the first virtual meeting communication data comprises first audio data, the method further comprising: during presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting, transcribing the first audio data captured via the at least one of the first plurality of computing devices; identifying, in the transcribed first audio data, a comment associated with a first portion of the particular document; and storing, at the cloud storage as part of the first metadata, the comment associated with the first portion of the particular document (at least paragraph 51; monitoring meeting events (such as user activity) via one or more sensors, (such as microphones, video), devices, chats, presented content, and the like. In some embodiments, the meeting activity monitor 252 outputs transcripts or activity that happens during a meeting. For example, activity or content may be timestamped or otherwise correlated with meeting transcripts; par. 22: Content (e.g., meeting presentations, agendas, invites, notes, chats, transcripts) from related meeting may also be associated with a common identification, described herein as a meeting thread ID. The association could be direct, such as by associating the thread ID as metadata to a content.; par. 55: the natural language utterance detector 257 can detect natural language utterances (such as chat messages) via natural language processing (NLP) only via, for example, parsing each word, tokenizing each word, tagging each word with a Part-of-Speech (POS) tag, and/or the like to determine the syntactic or semantic context. In these embodiments, the input may not be audio data, but may be written natural language utterances, such as chat messages.).
Claims 11, 15 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 1, 5 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra. Claims 11, 15 are corresponding system claims to method claims 1, 5.
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) 2, 10, 12, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson in view of Weiss et al (hereinafter “Weiss”, 2023/0244857).
As per Claim 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: assigning permissions associated with the particular document for the first plurality of participants based on a status of each of the first plurality of participants with respect to the first virtual meeting (at least paragraph 59; eg. participant role). Johnson fails to explicitly disclose wherein the permissions permit access to control presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting; and during the first virtual meeting: receiving a request to present the particular document from the first participant; and in response to determining that a first permission corresponding to the first participant permits the first participant to control presentation of the document: accessing the particular document stored in the cloud storage; and providing the particular document for display on each computing device of the first plurality of participants.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Weiss. Weiss discloses, in an analogous art, a meeting platform wherein users are given permissions in order to view or edit documents that are presented in the meeting (at least paragraph 96-97, 32). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Weiss’ permissions with Johnson as permissions are very well known in the art for documents and meetings, including a host of the meeting having the permission to host the document being presented and granting other attendees permission to participate, for example, and Weiss discloses that a document can be collaborative for multiple users to view or edit the document, yet limiting others or anyone from being able to edit the document, thereby providing document security.
As per Claim 10. Johnson fails to explicitly disclose determining a meeting permission for a user based on whether the user was a participant of the first virtual meeting or a participant of the second virtual meeting; and based on the meeting permission for the user, enabling the user to access either the first virtual meeting communication data or the second virtual meeting communication data associated with the document.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Weiss. Weiss discloses, in an analogous art, a meeting platform wherein users are given permissions in order to view or edit documents that are presented in the meeting and allowing meeting attendees permissions to view a meeting file (recording of the meeting) the attendees are associated with (at least paragraph 66, 96-97, 32). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Weiss’ permissions with Johnson as permissions are very well known in the art for documents and meetings, including a host of the meeting having the permission to host the document being presented and granting other attendees permission to participate, for example, and Weiss discloses that attendees of a meeting can be granted permission by the host to watch the meeting later, a well known benefit, particularly for a meeting that may be modified or enhanced with new information.
Claims 12, 20 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 2, 10 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra.
Claim(s) 3, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson in view of Weiss and Strader et al (hereinafter “Strader”, 2024/0037942).
As per Claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first virtual meeting is scheduled to include at least three participants (at least Fig. 5; P1-P5 participants of meeting A). Johnson fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first participant is a host of the first virtual meeting and the second participant is an author of the particular document, the method further comprising: assigning, to the host of the first virtual meeting, permission to control presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting; assigning, to the author of the particular document, permission to control presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting; and assigning, to all other participants, permissions that prevent control of the presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Weiss. Weiss discloses, in an analogous art, a meeting platform wherein users are given permissions in order to view or edit documents that are presented in the meeting (at least paragraph 96-97, 32). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Weiss’ permissions with Johnson as permissions are very well known in the art for documents and meetings, including a host of the meeting having the permission to host the document being presented and granting other attendees permission to participate, for example, and Weiss discloses that a document can be collaborative for multiple users to view or edit the document, yet limiting others or anyone from being able to edit the document, thereby providing document security.
Johnson and Weiss fail to explicitly disclose the second participant is an author of the particular document, assigning, to the author of the particular document, permission to control presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Strader. Strader discloses, in an analogous video meeting art, users having roles such as a host being a presenter and a creator associated with a document in the meeting, wherein the user can present their own version of the document (at least paragraph 20, 34). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Strader’s document authoring/creating with Johnson and Weiss as this allows the creator of the document an obvious permission to modify the document associated with the document ID or create a new document ID for documents that are used and presented in meetings to be edited with the creator’s knowledge and input of the creator is available.
Claim 13 does not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claim 3 and therefore is rejected for similar reasons, supra.
Claim(s) 4, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson in view of Kripalani et al (hereinafter “Kripalani”, 2009/0254839).
Johnson discloses wherein the first participant of the first virtual meeting is an author of the document (at least paragraph 22; meeting presentation and invite by participant), but fails to disclose the method further comprising: during the first virtual meeting: receiving a voice command from the author; and controlling presentation of the particular document based on the voice command. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Kripalani (at least paragraph 55, 38, 59). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Kripalani’s voice commands with Johnson, as Kripalani teaches this allows the conference host to easily remotely control slides of a meeting as they talk in a natural manner as if talking to a separate user that would manually control the slide navigation.
Claim 14 does not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claim 4 and therefore is rejected for similar reasons, supra.
Claim(s) 6-9, 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson in view of Cunnington et al (hereinafter “Cunnington”, 2011/0295392).
As per Claim 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the first virtual meeting communication data comprises first audio data (at least paragraph 30, 74; audio). Johnson further teaches utterances being monitored during the meeting and making suggestions based on the utterances, the suggestion output to the meeting attendees for confirmation during the meeting (at least paragraph 99-101, 112). Johnson fails to disclose the method further comprising: during presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting: identifying, based on the first audio data captured via the at least one of the first plurality of computing devices, a suggestion to modify a portion of the particular document; generating for display a preview of the portion of the particular document including the recommended modification; and generating for display, a prompt requesting a selection to accept or reject the recommended modification.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Cunnington. Cunnington discloses, in an analogous art, as feedback during a meeting to a speaker, presenter, or moderator, the system may provide a suggestion to modify presentation content when the system has detected that meeting participants get confused at a particular slide or demonstration (at least Cunnington paragraph 31, 40; Fig. 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Cunnington’s suggestion with Johnson’s meeting suggestions being displayed as Cunnington teaches such feedback being used in future meetings would help prevent confusion for the presented document when presenting it in a future meeting.
As per Claim 7. The method of claim 6, further comprising: receiving an input selection to accept the recommended modification; and modifying the particular document in the cloud storage to include the recommended modification (at least Cunnington paragraph 31, 40; Fig. 5; getting feedback in real-time and modifying presentation to regain audience trust; Johnson affirmation/confirmation to suggestion in par. 105, 112).
As per Claim 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the first virtual meeting communication data comprises first audio data, the method further comprising: during presentation of the particular document during the first virtual meeting, transcribing the first audio data captured via the at least one of the first plurality of computing devices (at least paragraph 110; content may be a transcript of the first meeting. The transcript may be generated by transcribing audio of the meeting. The audio may be recorded and transcribed by virtual meeting platforms).
Johnson discloses monitoring the meeting for spoken utterances wherein meeting intent and topics of discussion are determined and associated with another meeting (at least paragraph 99-101, 110, 116, 120). Johnson fails to explicitly disclose identifying one or more recommended modifications to the particular document included in the transcribed first audio data; generating a list of action items associated with the particular document, the action items based on the one or more recommended modifications included in the transcribed first audio data; and storing the list of action items associated with the particular document in the cloud storage.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Cunnington. Cunnington discloses, in an analogous art, as feedback during a meeting to a speaker, presenter, or moderator, the system may provide a suggestion to modify presentation content when the system has detected that meeting participants get confused at a particular slide or demonstration (at least Cunnington paragraph 31, 40; Fig. 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Cunnington’s suggestion with Johnson’s meeting suggestions being displayed as Cunnington teaches such feedback being used in future meetings would help prevent confusion for the presented document when presenting it in a future meeting.
As per Claim 9. The method of claim 8, wherein each of the action items in the list of action items is associated with a corresponding portion of the particular document, and wherein storing the list of action items associated with the particular document in the cloud storage comprises storing, in the cloud storage as third metadata associated with the particular document, the list of action items (at least Cunnington paragraph 31, 40; Fig. 5; eg. particular slide; Johnson par. 37: cloud).
Claims 16-19 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 6-9 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is indicated in PTO form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY G TODD whose telephone number is (303)297-4763. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5 MST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Nicholas Taylor can be reached on (571)272-3889. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GREGORY TODD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights