DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/22/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
3. With respect to Claim Objections, the Applicant corrects all the typos indicated in the Final Office Action. However, Claim 5 has a typo in claims filed on 07/22/2026. Thus, Claim Objections towards Claims 1,4, 10 have been withdrawn, and Claim Objections towards Claim 5 is maintained.
With respect to 101 Abstract idea, the amendment in Claims 1, 5, and 10 overcome the rejection. MPEP 2106.05(b)(I) states: “ If applicant amends a claim to add a generic computer or generic computer components and asserts that the claim recites significantly more because the generic computer is ‘specially programmed’ (as in Alappat, now considered superseded) or is a ‘particular machine’ (as in Bilski), the examiner should look at whether the added elements integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception.” Entitled “Particular Machine” is the basis upon which the claim is eligible. In considering subject matter for “particular machine” notice that there is an evaluation of “the particularity or generality of the elements of the machine or apparatus.” This “particularity” is found from the “additional elements” recited, how those additional elements are claimed to be operating with one another, and the operations themselves that are claimed to be performed from the additional elements. The independent claims recite a server, a first user device, a second user device, all of which are claimed in various ways as operating with each other in a particular manner, and the claim includes several operations for the various multiple element. Therefore, this claim appears to be a particular machine. MPEP 2106.05(b)(III) advises to consider whether only extra solution activity is recited via the particular machine. The operations recited by the claim are not just extra solution activity, but are directed towards the inventive concept/practical application. Given that “the invention is directed to converting the audio communication into a text communication corresponding to the audio communication based on determining that the receiving device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection” and that the claim recites operations accomplishing this, then the operations are not merely extra solution activity and so, are subject matter eligible. Thus, the 101 rejection have been withdrawn.
With respect to 112(b) rejection, the amended Claims overcome 112(b) rejection towards Claims 1-20 have been withdrawn.
With respect to 102/103 rejection, Applicant argues on pages 8-9 of the Remarks that “Mahajan does not disclose server-side, pre-delivery conversion. Mahajan describes the audio-to-text conversion as occurring at the transmitting client in response to a server instruction: : "the client system that generates and transmits the online meeting content will, in response to the instruction(s), activate appropriate STT ... codecs/applications to convert online meeting content comprising audio voice content into text and transmit the content ... over a TCP channel" (Mahajan, col. 3, lines 35-43; see also Mahajan, claim 19, col. 21, lines 18-34). Mahajan's Fig. 5 element 522, cited by the Examiner (Final Office Action, pp. 11, 13-15), appears in the media generating client flow diagram (Mahajan, col. 4, lines 27-31) and is a client-side act, not a server-side act. To the contrary, Mahajan distinguishes its architecture from server-side transcription approaches, characterizing its contribution as moving the conversion to the transmitting client so that conversion occurs before transmission to the server (Mahajan, col. 2, line 55 - col. 3, line 5). This is the opposite of the server-side pre-delivery conversion that amended claim 1 recites, and as such, Mahajan cannot be seen as disclosing each and every feature of independent claim 1. Each of claims 5 and 10 recite similar distinctions as claim 1. Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the 102 rejection from claims 1, 5, and 10.”
In response, Examiner respectfully notes that Mahajan disclose not only the audio-to-text conversion as occurring at the transmitting client in response to a server instruction, but also the audio-to-text conversion at the server based on determining that the receiving device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection (Mahajan Fig. 1, [0050] The transcoding layer 116 includes, in some instances, TTS (Text-to-Speech) capabilities and/or STT (speech-to-text) capabilities, for converting online meeting content into text from audio, and/or for converting online meeting content into audio, from text, [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems.) Please, see more details in the following 102(a)(1) rejection. The Applicant’s argument on the cited reference Mahajan is not persuasive. Examiner notes that US 2022/0159047 A1 is PG public of application 17/345703 which is CON of 17/116591. The cited reference in the Final Office Action is US 11,044,287 B1 which is patent of 17/116591.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: redundant word. In line 5, claim 5 is directed to “audio communication, originated by a first user device and addressed to to a second”. One of word “to” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
6. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 recites “20. (Currently Amended) The system of claim 19, further comprising determining that the text communication is a genuine text communication.”
In the specification, paragraph discloses “[00049] In further embodiments, AI detection software may be used to determine if an audio communication received by an MT is an AI generated voice, or a genuine audio communication transmitted by an MO. Herein, genuine audio communication describes an audio communication received from an MO associated with the audio communication. In embodiments, this audio communication could have originated as a text communication, and through the use of an AI model associated with the MO, converted to an audio communication. If the text communication originated from the MO, the resulting converted audio communication would be determined to be a genuine audio communication. If the text message that resulted in an audio communication representative of a user of the MO's vocal patters, was not communicated by the MO, then the audio communication would be determined not to be a genuine audio communication. In embodiments, AI models stored in association with an MT, or other computing devices associated with the network environment 200 may be used to determine if an audio communication received by the MT is a genuine audio communication from an MO associated with that AI model. If the audio communication is determined not to be a genuine audio communication, the MT may cause display of a notification indicating that the audio communication is not a genuine audio communication. If the audio communication is determined to be a genuine audio communication, the MT may cause display of a notification indicating that the audio communication is a genuine audio communication. This determination may be made by assessing the differences and similarities between the audio communication and an AI model stored in association with the MT, or other computing devices associated with the network environment 200. This determination may also be made by determining the address from which the audio communication is transmitted. If the audio communication is transmitted from a user device that is not associated with the MO who's AI model was used to convert or create the audio communication, it may be determined that the audio communication is not a genuine audio communication.”
The specification discloses determining that the audio communication is a genuine audio communication. The specification does not disclose determining that the text communication is a genuine text communication.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-3, 5-6, 10-13, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Mahajan et al. (US 2022/0159047 A1.)
With respect to Claim 1, Mahajan et al. disclose
A method for network communication, the method comprising:
receiving, at a server of a telecommunication network, an audio communication, originated by a first user device and addressed to a second user device (Mahajan et al. Fig. 1 Computing system 160 and 170, Network Connections 130 and 132, Server 110 includes Transcoding Layer 116 and Transmission Layer 118, [0050] The transcoding layer 116 includes, in some instances, TTS (Text-to-Speech) capabilities and/or STT (speech-to-text) capabilities, for converting online meeting content into text from audio, and/or for converting online meeting content into audio, from text, [0051] The transmission layer 118 and the transcoding layer 116 may each be located entirely at the server 110, [0069] In some embodiments, the server will transcode the content received from a first client in multiple different ways to use a different format and/or bitrate for each of a plurality of different recipient devices. Examiner notes that the server in Mahajan et al. receives the original format (e.g., audio or text) from the first device and transcodes the original format to another format at the server based on detecting the bandwidth constrained connection associated with second device (e.g., receiving device));
determining, by the server, that the second user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection (Mahajan et al. Claim 13: 13.The server of claim 7, wherein the detection of the connectivity issues comprises the server detecting a change in bandwidth availability for transmitting communications between the server and the receiving client system, [0106] describes the server determines a change in bandwidth availability for transmitting/receiving communication between the server system and either of the sending/receiving client system(s)); and
based on determining that the second user device is associated with the bandwidth constrained connection, and prior to delivery of the audio communication to the second user device, converting, by the server, the audio communication into a text communication corresponding to the audio communication (Mahajan et al. Claim 3: 3.The server of claim 1, wherein the computer-readable instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to configure the server to transcode the first online meeting content into text at the server, [0050] The transcoding layer 116 includes, in some instances, TTS (Text-to-Speech) capabilities and/or STT (speech-to-text) capabilities, for converting online meeting content into text from audio, and/or for converting online meeting content into audio, from text, [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems.)
With respect to Claim 2, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the bandwidth constrained connection precludes delivery of the audio communication to the second user device its originated form (Mahajan et al. [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems. The online meeting content is transcoded into an appropriate format (e.g., speech is transcoded into text, thus text format is a format to delivery) based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems.)
With respect to Claim 3, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the method further comprising communicating the text communication to the second user device over the bandwidth constrained connection in place of the audio communication (Mahajan et al. [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems.)
With respect to Claim 5, Claim 5 recites the similar features as Claim 1, thus Claim 5 is rejected as the same ground as Claim 1. Mahajan et al. disclose a computer-readable storage media at paragraph [0112].
With respect to Claim 6, Mahajan et al. disclose
further comprising:
cause display of the text communication on a graphical user interface associated with the second user device (Mahajan et al. [0072, 0074, 0090, 0096] describes render content in a text format on one or more display(s) on the receiving device(s).)
With respect to Claim 10, Mahajan et al. disclose
A system for network communication, the system comprising:
one or more computer processing components configured to perform operations comprising:
receiving, at a server of a telecommunication network, an audio communication, originated by a first user device and addressed to a second user device (Mahajan et al. Fig. 1 Computing system 120, 160 and 170, Network Connections 130 and 132, Server 110 includes Transcoding Layer 116 and Transmission Layer 118, [0050] The transcoding layer 116 includes, in some instances, TTS (Text-to-Speech) capabilities and/or STT (speech-to-text) capabilities, for converting online meeting content into text from audio, and/or for converting online meeting content into audio, from text, [0051] The transmission layer 118 and the transcoding layer 116 may each be located entirely at the server 110, [0069] In some embodiments, the server will transcode the content received from a first client in multiple different ways to use a different format and/or bitrate for each of a plurality of different recipient devices. Examiner notes that the server in Mahajan et al. receives the original format (e.g., audio or text) from the first device and transcodes the original format to another format at the server based on detecting the bandwidth constrained connection associated with second device (e.g., receiving device));
determining, by the server, that the second user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection (Mahajan et al. Claim 13: 13.The server of claim 7, wherein the detection of the connectivity issues comprises the server detecting a change in bandwidth availability for transmitting communications between the server and the receiving client system, [0106] describes the server determines a change in bandwidth availability for transmitting/receiving communication between the server system and either of the sending/receiving client system(s));
based on determining that the second user device is associated with the bandwidth constrained connection converting, by the server, the audio communication into a text communication corresponding to the audio communication (Mahajan et al. Claim 3: 3.The server of claim 1, wherein the computer-readable instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to configure the server to transcode the first online meeting content into text at the server, [0050] The transcoding layer 116 includes, in some instances, TTS (Text-to-Speech) capabilities and/or STT (speech-to-text) capabilities, for converting online meeting content into text from audio, and/or for converting online meeting content into audio, from text, [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems); and
communicating the text communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 1 elements 120, 160, 170 Computing system (Clients A, B and C), Transcoding Layer 116. The STT at 116 converts online meeting content into text from audio and transmit the text to other computing system device(s).)
With respect to Claim 11, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the audio communication is converted to the text communication in real-time (Mahajan et al. [0012] describes a real-time meeting, [0068] describes changing the format in real-time during a meeting.)
With respect to Claim 12, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein converting the audio communication to the text communication comprises generating the text communication by an artificial intelligence model (Mahajan et al. [0059] describes TTS and/or STT model is/are trained machine learning model.)
With respect to Claim 13, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the audio communication is converted to the text communication prior to receipt by the first user device ( Mahajan et al. (Mahajan et al. Claim 3: 3.The server of claim 1, wherein the computer-readable instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to configure the server to transcode the first online meeting content into text at the server, [0050] The transcoding layer 116 includes, in some instances, TTS (Text-to-Speech) capabilities and/or STT (speech-to-text) capabilities, for converting online meeting content into text from audio, and/or for converting online meeting content into audio, from text, [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems. The audio communication is converted to the text communication at the server prior to receipt by the receiving device. Claim 13 depends on Claim 10. Claim 10 recites “receiving, at a server of a telecommunication network, an audio communication, originated by a first user device and addressed to a second user device;” In Claim 10, the second user device is a receiving device. Thus, Examiner is interpreting claim 13 as prior to receipt by the second user device. Overall, Claim 13 is interpreted as the audio communication is converted to the text communication prior to receipt by the receiving device.)
With respect to Claim 18, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the bandwidth constrained connection precludes delivery of the audio communication to the second user device in its originated form (Mahajan et al. [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems. The online meeting content is transcoded into an appropriate format (e.g., speech is transcoded into text, thus format delivered is text, the format delivered is not audio) based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems.)
With respect to Claim 19, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the text communication is communicated in place of the audio communication (Mahajan et al. [0049] The transcoding layer 116 is configured to transcode the online meeting content into an appropriate format (text or audio packets for transmission over UDP or TCP channels, for example) and for transmission at a particular bitrate to one or more recipient devices (e.g., computing system 120, 160, 170). In some instances, the server determines the format and bitrate to use for encoding/transcoding data packets into based on detected processing and/or rendering capabilities of each recipient systems (e.g., Client A, B, C) and/or based on bandwidth or other network connection constraints detected for the channels of communication that are being used to communicate with those recipient systems.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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 of this title, 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.
10. Claims 4, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Mahajan et al. (US 2022/0159047 A1) in view of Jeon et al. (US 2026/0045964 A1.)
With respect to Claim 4, Mahajan et al. disclose all the limitations of Claim 1 upon which Claim 4 depends. Mahajan et al. fail to explicitly teach
wherein the second user device is determined to be associated with the bandwidth constrained connection by detecting that the second user device is connected to the telecommunication network via a satellite connection.
However, Jeon et al. teach
wherein the second user device is determined to be associated with the bandwidth constrained connection by detecting that the second user device is connected to the telecommunication network via a satellite connection (Jeon et al. [0091] the electronic device 101 may set an operation mode of at least one antenna to a reception mode based on identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify the event by identifying a user input for driving an application associated with satellite communication. In another embodiment, the application associated with satellite communication may include an application supporting transmission of text information for notifying an emergency circumstance, and the application associated with satellite communication is not limited to the above-described example, [0075] satellite communication based on the satellite 321 may support limited frequency resources and/or limited services. Satellite communication may provide, e.g., a limited service such as an emergency service (e.g., an emergency call) and/or a short message service (SMS), and may not support a service (e.g., video streaming, but not limited thereto) for transmitting and receiving other general data. In an embodiment, satellite communication may support a limited bandwidth (e.g., 1.4 MHz) compared to terrestrial communication.)
Mahajan et al. and Jeon et al. are analogous art because they are from a similar field of endeavor in the Speech Processing techniques and applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of changing format content in response to detecting connectivity issue as taught by Mahajan et al., using teaching of identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication as taught by Jeon et al. for the benefit of for driving an application associated with satellite communication (Jeon et al. [0091] the electronic device 101 may set an operation mode of at least one antenna to a reception mode based on identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify the event by identifying a user input for driving an application associated with satellite communication. In another embodiment, the application associated with satellite communication may include an application supporting transmission of text information for notifying an emergency circumstance, and the application associated with satellite communication is not limited to the above-described example, [0075] satellite communication based on the satellite 321 may support limited frequency resources and/or limited services. Satellite communication may provide, e.g., a limited service such as an emergency service (e.g., an emergency call) and/or a short message service (SMS), and may not support a service (e.g., video streaming, but not limited thereto) for transmitting and receiving other general data. In an embodiment, satellite communication may support a limited bandwidth (e.g., 1.4 MHz) compared to terrestrial communication.)
With respect to Claim 15, Mahajan et al. disclose all the limitations of Claim 10 upon which Claim 15 depends. Mahajan et al. fail to explicitly teach
wherein the second user device is determined to be associated with the bandwidth constrained connection by detecting that the second user device is connected to the telecommunications network via a satellite network.
However, Jeon et al. teach
wherein the second user device is determined to be associated with the bandwidth constrained connection by detecting that the second user device is connected to the telecommunications network via a satellite network (Jeon et al. [0091] the electronic device 101 may set an operation mode of at least one antenna to a reception mode based on identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify the event by identifying a user input for driving an application associated with satellite communication. In another embodiment, the application associated with satellite communication may include an application supporting transmission of text information for notifying an emergency circumstance, and the application associated with satellite communication is not limited to the above-described example, [0075] satellite communication based on the satellite 321 may support limited frequency resources and/or limited services. Satellite communication may provide, e.g., a limited service such as an emergency service (e.g., an emergency call) and/or a short message service (SMS), and may not support a service (e.g., video streaming, but not limited thereto) for transmitting and receiving other general data. In an embodiment, satellite communication may support a limited bandwidth (e.g., 1.4 MHz) compared to terrestrial communication.)
Mahajan et al. and Jeon et al. are analogous art because they are from a similar field of endeavor in the Speech Processing techniques and applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of changing format content in response to detecting connectivity issue as taught by Mahajan et al., using teaching of identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication as taught by Jeon et al. for the benefit of for driving an application associated with satellite communication (Jeon et al. [0091] the electronic device 101 may set an operation mode of at least one antenna to a reception mode based on identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication. For example, the electronic device 101 may identify the event by identifying a user input for driving an application associated with satellite communication. In another embodiment, the application associated with satellite communication may include an application supporting transmission of text information for notifying an emergency circumstance, and the application associated with satellite communication is not limited to the above-described example, [0075] satellite communication based on the satellite 321 may support limited frequency resources and/or limited services. Satellite communication may provide, e.g., a limited service such as an emergency service (e.g., an emergency call) and/or a short message service (SMS), and may not support a service (e.g., video streaming, but not limited thereto) for transmitting and receiving other general data. In an embodiment, satellite communication may support a limited bandwidth (e.g., 1.4 MHz) compared to terrestrial communication.)
11. Claims 7-9, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Mahajan et al. (US 2022/0159047 A1) in view of Demmitt et al. (US 2020/0036835 A1.)
With respect to Claim 7, Mahajan et al. disclose all the limitations of Claim 5 upon which Claim 7 depends. Mahajan et al. fail to explicitly teach
further comprising:
cause display of a notification on a graphical user interface indicating that the audio communication has been converted to the text communication.
However, Demmitt et al. teach
further comprising:
cause display of a notification on a graphical user interface indicating that the audio communication has been converted to the text communication (Demmitt et al. [0030] A system embodiment includes functionality to display current voicemail messages in a list format. A record displayed includes data including but not limited to date, time, caller and a selection of the transcribed message text as an aid for navigation and identification of the message.)
Mahajan et al. and Demmitt et al. are analogous art because they are from a similar field of endeavor in the Speech Processing techniques and applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of changing format content in response to detecting connectivity issue as taught by Mahajan et al., using teaching of displaying a selection of the transcribed message text as taught by Demmitt et al. for the benefit of enabling the user select the transcribed text of the message (Demmitt et al. [0030] A system embodiment includes functionality to display current voicemail messages in a list format. A record displayed includes data including but not limited to date, time, caller and a selection of the transcribed message text as an aid for navigation and identification of the message.)
With respect to Claim 8, Mahajan et al. and Demmitt et al. teach
wherein receiving a selection of the notification causes display of the text communication (Demmitt et al.[0030] A system embodiment includes functionality to display current voicemail messages in a list format. A record displayed includes data including but not limited to date, time, caller and a selection of the transcribed message text as an aid for navigation and identification of the message, [0034] If an individual voicemail has been selected by the user, a system embodiment displays the message in its own visual representation. This visual representation includes details on the caller and the message, as well as the actual content of the message itself. It displays the transcribed text of the message, and provides access to the audio recording of the voicemail.)
With respect to Claim 9, Mahajan et al. and Demmitt et al. teach
wherein receiving a selection of the notification causes display of a new graphical user interface associated with a set of text and audio communications (Demmitt et al.[0030] A system embodiment includes functionality to display current voicemail messages in a list format. A record displayed includes data including but not limited to date, time, caller and a selection of the transcribed message text as an aid for navigation and identification of the message, [0034] If an individual voicemail has been selected by the user, a system embodiment displays the message in its own visual representation. This visual representation includes details on the caller and the message, as well as the actual content of the message itself. It displays the transcribed text of the message, and provides access to the audio recording of the voicemail.)
With respect to Claim 14, Mahajan et al. disclose all the limitations of Claim 10 upon which Claim 14 depends. Mahajan et al. fail to explicitly teach
the operations further comprising causing display, on a graphical user interface of the first user device, of a notification indicating that the audio communication has been converted to the text communication.
However, Demmitt et al. teach
the operations further comprising causing display, on a graphical user interface of the first user device, of a notification indicating that the audio communication has been converted to the text communication (Demmitt et al. [0030] A system embodiment includes functionality to display current voicemail messages in a list format. A record displayed includes data including but not limited to date, time, caller and a selection of the transcribed message text as an aid for navigation and identification of the message.)
Mahajan et al. and Demmitt et al. are analogous art because they are from a similar field of endeavor in the Speech Processing techniques and applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of changing format content in response to detecting connectivity issue as taught by Mahajan et al., using teaching of displaying a selection of the transcribed message text as taught by Demmitt et al. for the benefit of enabling the user select the transcribed text of the message (Demmitt et al. [0030] A system embodiment includes functionality to display current voicemail messages in a list format. A record displayed includes data including but not limited to date, time, caller and a selection of the transcribed message text as an aid for navigation and identification of the message.)
12. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Mahajan et al. (US 2022/0159047 A1) in view of Jeon et al. (US 2026/0045964 A1) and Hata (US 2011/0136515 A1.)
With respect to Claim 16, Mahajan et al. in view of Jeon et al. teach all the limitation of Claim 15 upon which Claim 16 depends. Mahajan et al. in view of Jeon et al. fail to explicitly teach
wherein the server comprises a telecommunications core network component that operates as an interface between the satellite network and the telecommunications network.
However, Hata teaches
wherein the server comprises a telecommunications core network component that operates as an interface between the satellite network and the telecommunications network (Hata Fig. 1 elements 20 a satellite, 30 a base station, 40 a server, 50 a telecommunication network.)
Mahajan et al., Jeon et al. and Hata are analogous art because they are from a similar field of endeavor in the Speech Processing techniques and applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of changing format content in response to detecting connectivity issue as taught by Mahajan et al., using teaching of identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication as taught by Jeon et al. for the benefit of for driving an application associated with satellite communication, using teaching of the server, the base station, the telecommunication network as taught by Hata for the benefit of enabling the mobile terminal device performs communication with the base station based on the control of the server apparatus that is connected to a telecommunications network (Hata [0031] The mobile terminal device 10 performs communication with the base station 30 based on the control of the server apparatus 40 that is connected to a telecommunications network 50. Accordingly, it may perform a phonetic communication, or, sending/receiving of electronic mail, or browsing of WEB site.)
13. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Mahajan et al. (US 2022/0159047 A1) in view of Jeon et al. (US 2026/0045964 A1), Hata (US 2011/0136515 A1) and Xing (US 2026/0136343 A1.)
With respect to Claim 17, Mahajan et al. in view of Jeon et al. and Hata teach all the limitation of Claim 16 upon which Claim 17 depends. Mahajan et al. in view of Jeon et al. and Hata fail to explicitly teach
wherein a coverage area of the satellite network at least partially overlaps a coverage area of a terrestrial base station of the telecommunication network.
However, Xing teaches
wherein a coverage area of the satellite network at least partially overlaps a coverage area of a terrestrial base station of the telecommunication network (Xing Fig. 3 shows the region 301 overlaps with the region 302, [0050] FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a satellite communication scenario according to some embodiments of the present disclosure. In the scenario, a region 301 corresponding to an NTN (non-terrestrial network) coverage provided by a satellite 120 is overlapped with a region 302 corresponding to a TN (terrestrial network) coverage provided by a terrestrial base station 140. A first terminal device 210 is outside the region 302 and within the region 301. In the scenario, the region 301 is usually much greater than the region 302, and the region 301 may be overlapped with a plurality of regions 302. The embodiments of the present disclosure are illustrated by taking one region 302 as an example.)
Mahajan et al., Jeon et al., Hata and Xing are analogous art because they are from a similar field of endeavor in the Speech Processing techniques and applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of changing format content in response to detecting connectivity issue as taught by Mahajan et al., using teaching of identifying an event that triggers initiation of satellite communication as taught by Jeon et al. for the benefit of for driving an application associated with satellite communication, using teaching of the server, the base station, the telecommunication network as taught by Hata for the benefit of enabling the mobile terminal device performs communication with the base station based on the control of the server apparatus that is connected to a telecommunications network, using teaching of overlapping between the TN and NTN as taught by Xing for the benefit of transmitting or receiving an NTN signal within a TN spectrum (Xing Figs. 7 and 8.)
14. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Mahajan et al. (US 2022/0159047 A1) in view of Martin et al. (US 2024/0144935 A1.)
With respect to Claim 20, Mahajan et al. disclose all the limitations of Claim 19 upon which Claim 20 depends. Mahajan et al. fail to explicitly teach
further comprising determining that the text communication is a genuine text communication.
However, Martin et al. teach
further comprising determining that the text communication is a genuine text communication (Martin et al. [0055] During training, the linguistic encoding and linguistic transfer networks become progressively more effective at generating written text having the style or linguistic traits of the user based on feedback from the linguistic discriminative network, while the linguistic discriminative network learns to identify text that genuinely originates from a corresponding alleged user. Once trained, the linguistic discriminative network may be employed by grammatical model 182 to distinguish texts corresponding to an impersonator from genuine texts from an alleged user.)
Mahajan et al. and Martin et al. are analogous art because they are from a similar field of endeavor in the Speech Processing techniques and applications. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steps of changing format content in response to detecting connectivity issue as taught by Mahajan et al., using teaching of training of grammatical model as taught by Martin et al. for the benefit of distinguishing texts corresponding to an impersonator from genuine texts from an alleged user (Martin et al. [0055] During training, the linguistic encoding and linguistic transfer networks become progressively more effective at generating written text having the style or linguistic traits of the user based on feedback from the linguistic discriminative network, while the linguistic discriminative network learns to identify text that genuinely originates from a corresponding alleged user. Once trained, the linguistic discriminative network may be employed by grammatical model 182 to distinguish texts corresponding to an impersonator from genuine texts from an alleged user.)
Conclusion
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to application’s disclosure. See PTO-892.
a. Ganesan et al. (US 2017/0125019 A1.) In this reference, Ganesan et al. disclose converting a voice message input to text in response to determining that a signal quality value associated with an audio signal received from call device satisfies a threshold value.
b. Lennartsson (US 2008/0253538 A1.) In this reference, Lennartsson disclose converting speech to corresponding text and converting the corresponding text to the corresponding automated voice communication.
c. Jackson et al. (US 2012/0002794 A1.) In this reference, Jackson et al. provides a voicemail to text conversion service.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THUYKHANH LE whose telephone number is (571)272-6429. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9am-5pm.
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, Andrew C. Flanders can be reached on 571-272-7516. 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.
/THUYKHANH LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2655
Prosecution Insights