DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment submission filed on 1/8/2026. Claims 1-3, 6-9, 11, 12 were amended. Claims 4, and 5 were canceled, and claim 13 is new. Claims 1-3, 6-13 are pending in the application of which Claims 1, 11, and 12 are independent 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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed in the Amendment filed 1/8/2026 (herein “Amendment”) with respect to the Applicant’s arguments and amendments in the Amendment with respect to claim objection raised in the previous office action have been fully considered, and they are persuasive. Therefore, the claim objection of various claims is withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed with respect to the 35 USC 101 rejections raised in the previous office action have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claimed invention, as currently amended, overcomes the 35 USC 101 rejections. Therefore, the 35 USC 101 rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed with respect to the 35 USC §102 rejection raised in the previous office action have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection which was necessitated by applicant’s amendment. Therefore, the previous rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is introduced for independent claims further replacing Goo with the combination of Nguyen et al. (US20030050778A1), and Kim et al. (US9344554B2), and Venson M. Shaw (US20130101097A1).
Please see prior art section below for more detail including updated citations and obviousness rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen et al. (US20030050778A1)(herein " Nguyen "), and in further view of Kim et al. (US9344554B2)(herein "Kim"), and Venson M. Shaw (US20130101097A1)(herein “Shaw”).
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 12 Nguyen teaches [A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to execute a control method of controlling an information processing apparatus, the control method comprising: - claim 1], [A method of controlling an information processing apparatus, comprising: - claim 11], and [An information processing apparatus, comprising: a display; and at least one processor or circuitry configured to perform operations comprising: - claim 12] (Nguyen, Par. 0010:” … a computer implemented speech recognition system for generating e-mail messages based upon focused language models which are accessed …”, and Par. 0018:” The computer system 18 includes a microcomputer, a digital signal processor, or a similar device which has a combination of a CPU 30, a ROM 32, a RAM 34, and an input/output section 36.”, and Par. 0026:’ … the computer system 18 via the input/output section 36 and can be stored in RAM 34 until processed by the voice recognizer section 60 of the e-mail message module 50.” and Par. 0005:” … text messages are summarized by the system so that they can be displayed and edited by the user on the comparatively small screen of the device.)
causing the information processing apparatus to execute processing for converting a content of a voice message received by the information processing apparatus into text; (Nguyen, Par. 0027:” Once the voice message is converted to text, a text summarizer section 62 can be implemented for summarizing the converted text in order to reduce the amount of text that is to be displayed on the display screen 14 of the personal digital assistant 10. Because the display screen 14 is relatively small, the text summarizer section 62 allows the processor 18 to reduce the size of the text message. …”).
causing the information processing apparatus to perform summarization of the text into a summarized text; (Nguyen, Par. 0027:” Once the voice message is converted to text, a text summarizer section 62 can be implemented for summarizing the converted text in order to reduce the amount of text that is to be displayed on the display screen 14 of the personal digital assistant 10. Because the display screen 14 is relatively small, the text summarizer section 62 allows the processor 18 to reduce the size of the text message. …”).
causing the information processing apparatus to display text indicating that the voice message has been converted into the summarized text; ( Nguyen, Par. 0027:” Once the voice message is converted to text, a text summarizer section 62 can be implemented for summarizing the converted text in order to reduce the amount of text that is to be displayed on the display screen 14 of the personal digital assistant 10. Because the display screen 14 is relatively small, the text summarizer section 62 allows the processor 18 to reduce the size of the text message. …”).
Nguyen, does not teach, however, Kim teaches causing the information processing apparatus to display an identification corresponding to a sender of the voice message and an object that performs, in response to the object being selected by a user of the information processing apparatus, an action for playing the voice message; (Kim, Col. 8, ll. 4-17:” As shown in view 301 of FIG. 3, when a portable terminal user activates a file playback function, the portable terminal 100 displays a file playback screen 330 for playing back a user's selected file on the display unit. The file playback screen 330 is composed of an information displaying area 331 for displaying a name of a user's selected file, an image related to the file, etc., a control key area 335 for displaying a control signal to play back a file according to a touch event, and a proceeding bar area 333 for indicating the file playback lapse. If the portable terminal 100 receives a message from a mobile communication system during the file playback, it can display a message reception icon 343 notifying the user that a message has been received on one side of the file playback screen 330.”, and fig. 3, screen view of 303, under message screen 345 depicts the name of the sender: “From: Chali”).
wherein the summarized text is displayed under the object that performs the action for playing the voice message in response to the object being selected by the user of the information processing apparatus. (Kim, Col. 8, ll. 36-52:” … terminal 100 detects a voice signal to check the received message, it can activate a message function. In that case, as shown in view 303 of FIG. 3, the portable terminal 100 displays a message screen 345 for showing a received message and a reduced file playback screen 340. That is, the file playback screen 330 is reduced or may be partially or fully removed in order to display the received message. In the illustrated example, the reduced file playback screen 340 is composed of an information displaying area 337, a part of which is reduced or removed, compared with the information displaying area 331 shown in view 301, a control key area 335 for playing back a file, and a proceeding bar area 333. The reduced file playback screen 340 is arranged in the middle portion and the upper portion of the display unit. On the other hand, the message screen 345 is arranged at the lower portion of the display unit 141, i.e., below the reduced file playback screen 340.”)
Kim is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. 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 Nguyen further in view of Kim to cause the information processing apparatus to display an identification corresponding to a sender of the voice message and an object that performs, in response to the object being selected by a user of the information processing apparatus, an action for playing the voice message; wherein the summarized text is displayed under the object that performs the action for playing the voice message in response to the object being selected by the user of the information processing apparatus. Motivation to do so would allow a user to easily use the plurality of user functions according to various types of input signals, and maintains the connection with tasks added while the user is operating a plurality of tasks (Kim, Col. 1, ll. 54-58).
Nguyen, as modified above, does not teach, however, Shaw teaches receiving a setting for setting whether or not to attach the summarized text to the voice message when the voice message is transmitted; and (Shaw, Par. 0036:” In accordance with a fifth embodiment and with reference to FIG. 6, a visual voice mail may be transcribed to text via a system switch. At 90, the visual voice mail server receives a new incoming voice message. At 92 the visual voice mail server transcribes the voice message to text. At 94, the visual voice mail server sends the message waiting notification indicator to the subscriber. The message waiting notification indicator [settings] also provides an interface to the system which informs allow the system to select and determine whether the subscriber desires to receive the text transcription together with the audio file, a determination which is made at 96. If the system indicates that the subscriber should receive both an audio file and a text file, then both audio and text are delivered at 98. If the system indicates that the subscriber should only receive a voice message, then the voice message is delivered at 100.”) Note: message waiting notification indicator reads on setting since the system select whether to attach voice message or not.
causing the information processing apparatus to display, based on the setting, the summarized text, (Shaw, Par. 0048:” … The UI portion 444 is capable of rendering any information utilized in conjunction the visual voice mail as described herein. For example, the UI portion 444 can provide means for entering text (including numbers), entering a phone number, rendering text, rendering images, rendering multimedia, rendering sound, rendering video, receiving sound, or the like, as described herein. … the UI portion 444 can comprise a display, a touch screen, a keyboard, a speaker, or any combination thereof.”)
Shaw is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. 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 Nguyen, as modified above, further in view of Shaw to receive a setting for setting whether or not to attach the summarized text to the voice message when the voice message is transmitted; and causing the information processing apparatus to display, based on the setting, the summarized text. Motivation to do so would allow a subscriber to selectably convert voice mail to text when the subscriber is unavailable to listen to the voice mail (Shaw, Par. 0031).
Regarding claim 13, Nguyen, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 1.
Nguyen, as modified above, does not teach, however, Kim teaches wherein the indication that the summarized text is completed is displayed under the object that performs the action for playing the voice message in response to the object being selected by the user of the information processing apparatus.
Nguyen, as modified above, further teaches wherein the summarized text is displayed [[under both of the object that performs the action for playing the voice message and the text indicating that the voice message has been converted into the summarized text]] (Nguyen, in Par. 0027 teaches Once the voice message is converted to text, a text summarizer section 62 can be implemented for summarizing the converted text in order to reduce the amount of text that is to be displayed on the display screen 14 of the personal digital assistant 10.)
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen, Kim, and Shaw, and in further view of Nakamura (US 20230223124 A1) .
Nakamura was applied in the previous Office Action.
Regarding claim 2, Nguyen, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 1.
Nguyen, as modified above, does not teach, however, Nakamura teaches wherein the summarized text is displayed in a form different from normal text messages displayed. (Nakamura, Par. 0129:” In Modification Example 2-1 above, in a case where status information indicating that the user has determined that it is an erroneous detection is assigned, the controller 36 may change a display form of the summary information of the group to which the status information is assigned. … In addition to this, for example, by different character colors, thicknesses, italic, and font types, different character background colors, and different line types of character enclosing lines, a display form of summary information of a group to which the work status of an “erroneous detection” is assigned may be changed. By displaying the information so …”).
Nakamura is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. 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 Nguyen, as modified above, further in view of Nakamura to wherein the summarized text is displayed in a form different from normal text messages displayed. Motivation to do so would improve user’s visibility of the presented information (Nakamura, Par. 0107).
Regarding claim 3, Nguyen, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 2.
Nguyen, as modified above, does not teach, however, Nakamura further teaches wherein the summarized text is displayed in a display form including a character and a color which are different from the normal text messages displayed. (Nakamura, Par. 0129:” In Modification Example 2-1 above, in a case where status information indicating that the user has determined that it is an erroneous detection is assigned, the controller 36 may change a display form of the summary information of the group to which the status information is assigned. … In addition to this, for example, by different character colors, thicknesses, italic, and font types, different character background colors, and different line types of character enclosing lines, a display form of summary information of a group to which the work status of an “erroneous detection” is assigned may be changed. By displaying the information so …”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen, Kim, and Shaw, and in further view of Han (US 20230359836 A1).
Han was applied in the previous Office Action.
Regarding claim 6, Nguyen, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 1.
Nguyen, as modified above, does not teach, However, Han teaches wherein the information processing apparatus is caused to perform the summarization of the text based on a predetermined number of character strings from a start of the text, or date and time and a place which are described in the text. (Han, Par. 0107:” According to an embodiment, the summary model 320 may be trained to output the summary text based on a length of a pre-set summary text. For example, when pre-set to obtain the summary text including five words, the summary model 320 may output the summary text of a length including the five words regardless of a number of words included in the input phrase. “)
Han is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine Nguyen, as modified above, with Han. As implied in Han [Par. 0023], one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the teachings because it would offer the benefit of conciseness and improved readability.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen, Kim, and Shaw, and in further view of Zafar (US20090003540A1).
Zafar was applied in the previous Office Action.
Regarding claim 7, Nguyen, as modified above, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 1.
Nguyen, as modified above, does not teach, However, Zafar teaches causing the information processing apparatus to display an object for receiving the setting for setting whether or not to attach the summarized text to the voice message when the voice message is transmitted. (Zafar, Par. 0017:” … The systems and methods may filter the content of the voice mail messages and may perform actions on the voice mail messages based on user preferences. For example, in one implementation, the systems and methods may convert the audio voice mail messages to text voice mail messages, and may extract information (e.g., topics, summary, keywords, context, etc.) from the text voice mail messages. The information, the text voice mail messages, and the voice mail messages may be provided (e.g., displayed) to a user, and the user may access, review, prioritize, reply to, etc. this content as desired.”, and Par. 0064:” FIG. 9 is a diagram of an exemplary user interface 900 that may be provided by VMA server 125 (e.g., by display information logic 420) to one of user devices 135 (e.g., to displays of user devices 135). User interface 900 may be displayed if a user selects see related button 750 (FIG. 7). As shown in FIG. 9, user interface 900 may depict content (e.g., voice mail, e-mail, SMS, text, or instant messages, etc.) that may be related to the selected voice mail message of FIG. 7. The relation between the related content and the selected voice mail message may be based on user-defined preferences (e.g., similarity of subject matter, author, topic, date, etc.).”)
Zafar is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. 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 Nguyen, as modified above, further in view of Zafar to cause the information processing apparatus to display an object for receiving the setting for setting whether or not to attach the summarized text to the voice message when the voice message is transmitted. Motivation to do so would determine a delivery method for the voice mail information based on user preferences (Zafar, Par. 0023).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen, Kim, and Shaw, and in further view of Jang (US10572726 B1).
Jang was applied in the previous Office Action.
Regarding claim 8, Nguyen, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 1.
Nguyen, as modified above, does not teach, however, Jang teaches receiving an input of a character string, and causing the information processing apparatus to search for the summarized text using the received character string. (Jang, col. 4, ll. 37-45:” In some embodiments the keywords 116 input may include instructions to the media summarizer 104 to automatically identify keywords and to generate the summary 112 based on the identified keywords. Alternately or additionally, the keywords 116 input may include one or more words supplied and/or otherwise identified by the user. For example, a user may identify a keyword from the summary 112 and the summary 112 may be updated to include the additionally identified keyword.”)
Jang is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. 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 Nguyen, as modified above, further in view of Jang to receiving an input of a character string, and causing the information processing apparatus to search for the summarized text using the received character string. Motivation to do so would be in order to extract the information the user considers important (Jang, Col. 1, ll. 61-62).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen, Kim, and Shaw, and in further view of Rohde (US 20090252305 A1).
Rohde was applied in the previous Office Action.
Regarding claim 9, Nguyen, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 1.
Nguyen, does not teach, however, Rohde teaches wherein the information processing apparatus executes the processing for converting the content of the voice message into the text and performs the summarization of the text into the summarized text by causing an external server to convert the content of the voice message into the text and perform the summarization of the text into the summarized text and receiving the summarized text. (Rohde, Par. 0031:” … the server 116 generates a summary or textual summary of the voice message. ... Also, the server 116 may convert an entire voice message into text and then generate a summary based on the text data. Any known or future technique of summarizing voice or speech content may be used.”, and Par. 0014:” … Textual summaries of the voice messages are transmitted to a user interface corresponding to the ...”, and Par. 0016:” … The server is further operable to transmit the textual summary to the one of the plurality of devices.”, and Par. 0040:”… The summary content may be transmitted to the user device 201 separate from the data 213.”)
Rohde is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. 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 Nguyen, as modified above, further in view of Rohde to wherein the information processing apparatus executes the processing for converting the content of the voice message into the text and performs the summarization of the text into the summarized text by causing an external server to convert the content of the voice message into the text and perform the summarization of the text into the summarized text and receiving the summarized text. Motivation to do so would prioritize important voice messages that are relatively more important or relevant to act on (Rohde, Par. 0003).
Regarding claim 10, Nguyen, as modified above, teaches the storage medium of claim 1.
Nguyen, does not teach, however, Rohde teaches wherein the information processing apparatus is a mobile terminal. (Rohde, Par. 0040:” … The summary content may be transmitted to the user device 201 separate from the data 213.”, and Par. 0021:” The user device 104 is a wireless device (e.g., a cellular phone, a PDA, a wireless computer), … “, and Par. 0039:” … For example, the user device 201 is a cellular telephone, a digital telephone, a computer, or a PDA. … “, and Par. 0040:” … The summary content may be transmitted to the user device … “, and Par. 0054:”… Alternatively, the summaries are generated in or by the user device that executes the user interface.”)
Rohde is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. 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 Nguyen, as modified above, further in view of Rohde to wherein the information processing apparatus is a mobile terminal. Motivation to do so would prioritize important voice messages that are relatively more important or relevant to act on (Rohde, Par. 0003).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Lee et al. (US 20210297371A1) teaches in Par. 0042:” … an instant message, which is including information related to a content, input from another user device 105 participating in the chatroom and display the instant message received through the chatroom. Here, the information related to the content may include information that defines the content or explains the origin of the content and address information of the content, specifically, link information of the content. For example, the user device 100 may display at least one of link information or summary information matched with the link information.”
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers and/or paragraph numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIOUSH AGAHI, P.E. whose telephone number is (408)918-7689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
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, Bhavesh Mehta can be reached at 571-272-7453. 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.
DARIOUSH AGAHI, P.E.
Primary Examiner
/DARIOUSH AGAHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2656