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 .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
2. With respect to 101 Abstract idea, Applicant argues that
“Claim 1 is directed to solving a technical problem of an inherently technical field. Namely, transmission of data over bandwidth constrained communication networks. This is not a process that can be accomplished in the human mind, and even if it could, the solution recited by the claims are at least an improvement to telecommunication technologies.
The MPEP is clear that first, “the specification should be evaluated to determine if the disclosure provides sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement” and second, “the claim must be evaluated to ensure that the claim itself reflects the disclosed improvement.” MPEP §2106.04(d)(1). An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies a technical problem and explains the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. MPEP § 2106.05(a). For example, in McRO, the Federal Circuit relied on the specification's explanation of how the particular rules recited in the claim enabled the automation of specific animation tasks that previously could only be performed subjectively by humans, when determining that the claims were directed to improvements in computer animation instead of an abstract idea. McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1313-14 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
The present Specification provides sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement (e.g., including a discussion that identifies a technical problem and explains the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or that identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art). For Example, at paragraphs [00017] states that “when the MT is on a bandwidth-constrained network, the MT may only be able to receive certain forms of communication (e.g., SMS messages) but not others (e.g., voice calls). Therefore, the MT may not receive a communication initiated by the MO that is in unsupported form.” See Specification at para [00017]. The Specification goes on to state that “when a user device 216 are communicating through a satellite 214, there may be reductions in bandwidth such that communications with user devices (such as user devices 210B and 210A) associated with terrestrial base stations... are affected.” Id. at para [00032]. “For example, the MT may be located in an area where the MT is only connected to a satellite 214, such as when the MT is traveling on an airplane. In said situation, the network to which the MT is connected may be bandwidth constrained. Using conventional methods, if an MO were to attempt to communicate with the MT which is connected to a bandwidth constrained network, the communication may fail, particularly if the MT's connection to the bandwidth constrained network only permits one type of communication (e.g., SMS) and the MO originated a non-compliant communication type (e.g., voice call).” Id. at para [00033]. To Specification provides a solution such that “this audio communication may be converted by the MO, or by the server 202, or any other device associated with the telecommunications network 204 such that before the MT receives the communication, it is converted to a text communication. Id. at para [00034].
These solutions are not simply recited in the specification, but are specifically addressed in amended claim 1. It is determined that a user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection, and based on determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection, an audio communication is converted into a text communication corresponding to the audio communication. As such, the claims at least recite an improvement to telecommunication technologies by providing a solution to transmitting communications over bandwidth constrained networks.
Therefore, for at least this reason, claim 1 is not directed to a judicial exception, and instead recites allowable subject matter. Each of claims 5 and 10 recite similar distinctions as claim 1. As such, for at least these reasons, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection of claims 1, 5, and 10 under U.S.C. § 101. Claims 1, 5, and 10 are believed to be in condition for allowance, and such favorable action is respectfully requested.”
First of all, Applicant is reminded that lack of novelty under 35 U.S.C. 101 or obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 of a claimed invention does not necessarily indicate that additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional elements. Because they are separate and distinct requirements from eligibility, patentability of the claimed invention under U.S.C. 102 and 103 with respect to the prior art is neither required for, nor a guarantee of, patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C 101. The distinction between eligibility (under 35 U.S.C. 101) and patentability over the art (under 35 U.S.C. 102 and/or 103) is discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(d).
Secondly, Examiner respectfully notes determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection and converting the audio communication into the text communication is/are mental processes. For example, the human observes system sluggishness, high latency, or broken connections. Based on the observation, the human determines that the connection has a bandwidth constrained, next the human could convert an audio message to text message. Since the improvement is a part of the abstract mental process, it would not available to qualify as an improvement to technology in step 2A prong 2.
The limitation “communication an audio communication to a user device;” is mere network connecting recited at a high level of generality, thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g) (“whether the limitation is significant”) In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such network connecting, and, as such, this limitation do not impose any meaningful limit of the claim. This limitation amounts to necessary network connecting. See MPEP 2106.05.
The limitation “determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection;” The claim recites only outcome of determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection and do not include any technical details about how the “determining” is accomplished. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive, and thus for these reasons, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Consequently, the 101 abstract idea rejection is maintained.
With respect to 101 signal per se rejection, the amended claims 5-9 overcome the rejection, thus the 101 signal per se rejection has been withdrawn.
With respect to 102/103 rejection, Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground to rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenge in the argument.
Claim Objections
3. Claims 1, 4-5 and 10 are objected to because of the following information:
Claims 1 and 5 recite “based on determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection,”. “bandwidth constrained connection” is defined previously, thus this limitation should be changed to “based on determining that the user device is associated with the bandwidth constrained connection,”
Claim 5 recites “Non-transitory computer-readable…” This should be changed to “A non-transitory computer-readable…”.
Claim 4 recites “4. (Currently Amended) The method of claim [[3]]…Applicant cancel number 3 without adding another number to indicate which claim that claim 4 depends. For compact prosecution, Examiner interprets Claim 4 depends on Claim 3.
Claim 10 recites “based on determining that the first user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection”. “bandwidth constrained connection” is defined previously, thus this limitation should be changed to “based on determining that the first user device is associated with the bandwidth constrained connection,”
Claim 10 recites “based on determining that the first user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection converting the message from the audio message to a text message corresponding to the audio message; and” This limitation should be changed to “based on determining that the first user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection, converting the message from the audio message to a text message corresponding to the audio message; and” The comma should be placed between “connection” and “converting”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
5. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claims 1-20 are directed to the abstract idea of mental processes.
Claim 1 recites
“1. (Currently Amended) A method for network communication, the method comprising:
communicating an audio communication to a user device;
determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection;
and
based on determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection, converting the audio communication into a text communication corresponding to the audio communication.”
Claims 1, 5 and 10 recite substantially the same concept but do so in the context of a method, a non-transitory computer readable storage media and a system.
The limitations recited in the independent claims 1, 5 and 10 as drafted covers a mental processes. More specifically, the underlying abstract idea revolved around what happen once a human observes system sluggishness, high latency, or broken connections. Based on the observation, the human determines that the connection has a bandwidth constrained, next the human could convert an audio message to text message.
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claims recite the additional limitations of a network communication, a non-transitory computer-readable storage media, one or more processors, and a system. The additional element(s) or combination of elements such as a network communication, a computer-readable storage media, one or more processors, and a system in the claim(s) other than the abstract idea per se amount(s) to no more than (i) mere instructions to implement the idea on a computer, and/or (ii) recitation of generic computer structure that serves to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the pertinent industry. Viewed as a whole, these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Therefore, the claim(s) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter. There is further no improvement to the computing device other than converting a message from one format to another format. The mere recitation of a network communication, a computer-readable storage media, one or more processors, and a system and/or the like is akin of adding the word “apply it” and/or “use it” with a computer in conjunction with the abstract idea. The paragraph [00020 and 00024] of the present specification discloses “[00020] A second aspect of the present disclosure is directed to a computer-readable storage media having computer –executable instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to receive an audio communication at a user device associated with a set of user preferences. The computer-executable instructions further determine, by the user device, an output form for the communication based on the set of user preferences associated with the user device, wherein the output form is a text communication, and convert the audio communication into the text communication based on the set of user preferences, [00024] With continued reference to FIG. 1, computing device 100 includes bus 102 that directly or indirectly couples the following devices: memory 104, one or more processors 106, one or more presentation components 108, input/output (I/O) ports 110, I/O components 112, and power supply 114. Bus 102 represents what may be one or more busses (such as an address bus, data bus, or combination thereof). Although the devices of FIG. 1 are shown with lines for the sake of clarity, in reality, delineating various components is not so clear, and metaphorically, the lines would more accurately be grey and fuzzy. For example, one may consider a presentation component such as a display device to be one of I/O components 112. Also, processors, such as one or more processors 106, have memory. The present disclosure hereof recognizes that such is the nature of the art, and reiterates that FIG. 1 is merely illustrative of an exemplary computing environment that can be used in connection with one or more implementations of the present disclosure. Distinction is not made between such categories as “workstation,” “server,” “laptop,” “handheld device,” etc., as all are contemplated within the scope of FIG. 1 and refer to “computer” or “computing device.”
As filed in the specification, the computer is listed as a general-purpose computer and are mainly used as an application thereof. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a computer is noted as a general computer. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible.
The dependent claims further do not remedy the issues noted above. More specifically, Claim 2 recites the converting is in real-time. The human could convert audio to text in real-time. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 3 recites generating the text communication based on the artificial intelligence model. This reads on the human could type/write down what she heard. The AI model is used to generally apply the abstract idea without placing any limits on how the AI model functions. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 4 recites transcribe prior sending the text communication. The reads on the human could type what she heard and send it to another user. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 6 recites display of the text communication on a graphical user interface associated with the user device. This reads on the human could write down the text message on the paper and give it to the user. The use of a graphical user interface amounts to extra-solutional activity to output the result of converting the audio message to the text message which could be displayed by a human using a pend and a paper. The display also functions according to its well-known function of presenting the text message is well-known as is shown in the 2B analysis. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 7 recites cause display of a notification on a graphical user interface indicating that the audio communication has been converted to the text communication. This reads on the human could write on the paper that the audio message has been converted to the text message and give it to the user. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 8 recites receiving a selection of the notification causes display of the text communication. The human gets a feedback from the user, wherein the feedback indicates that the user would like to see the text message. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 9 recites receiving a selection of the notification causes display of a new graphical user interface associated with a set of text and audio communications. This reads on the human gives the text message to the user in response to receiving the feedback from the user. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 11 recites the first form is an audio communication. This reads on the human could listen a voice message. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 12 recites the second form is a text communication. This reads on the human could write down what she heard on the paper. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 13 recites converting the message from the first form to the second form comprises converting the audio communication to the text communication. This reads on the human could write down what she heard on the paper. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 14 recites the first form is a text communication. Claim 15 recites the second form is an audio communication. Claim 16 recites converting the message from the first form to the second form comprises converting the text communication to the audio communication. Claims 14-16 read on the human receives a text message and read the text message to the user. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 17 recites generating the audio communication based on an artificial intelligence model associated with a first user. This reads on the human could read the text message in the user speech patterns. The AI model is used to generally apply the abstract idea without placing any limits on how the AI model functions. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 18 recites the artificial intelligence model is generated based on a set of audio recordings associated with the first user. This reads on the human could listen and learn the vocal patterns from the user. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 19 recites the audio communication generated based on the artificial intelligence model comprises a set of vocal sounds and patterns associated with the first user. This reads on the human could read the text message in the user’s speech patterns. The AI model is used to generally apply the abstract idea without placing any limits on how the AI model functions. There are no additional limitations presented. Claim 20 defines the audio communication is a genuine audio communication. There are no additional limitations presented.
For at least the supra provided reasons, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claims 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the
subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the message” in “converting the message from the audio message to a text message…”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation should be change to “converting
Claim 11 recites “the first form”. There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. Claim 10 does not define a first form.
Claim 12 recites “the second form”. There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. Claims 10-11 do not define a second form.
Claim 13 recites further limitation of “the first form” and “the second form”.
Claim 14 recites “the first form”. There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. Claim 10 does not define a first form.
Claim 15 recites “the second form”. There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. Claims 10 and 14 do not define a second form.
Claim 16 recites further limitation of “the first form” and “the second form”.
Claims 17-20 is rejected as the same ground by virtue of dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-6 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Mahajan et al. (US 11,044,287 B1.)
With respect to Claim 1, Mahajan et al. disclose
A method for network communication, the method comprising:
communicating an audio communication to a user device (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 510 Establish communications with client(s) over a first channel using a first protocol, col. 2 lines 7-13 describes User Datagram protocol (UDP) is desired over Transmission Control protocol (TCP) for audio and video since it is faster than TPC and TCP is desired over UDP for text because it is more reliable than UDP);
determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 530 monitor network connectivity to identify network connectivity problem, col. 5 lines 25-41 describes managing online meetings and communications, converting audio to text in response to detecting connectivity issues (e.g., poor connection, interruptions in connection, bandwidth restrictions, etc.), col. 7 lines 8-16 monitoring network connectivity to identify and assess network connectivity issues associated with variations in bandwidth constraints for transmitting the online meeting content over the network connections and to track packet transmissions to identify, detect and quantify connectivity issues that could negatively impact the quality of transmitting and/or rendering the online meeting content subject to potential packet loss and/or jitter); and
based on determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection, converting the audio communication into a text communication corresponding to the audio communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Modify format convert Audio/Text (i.e., converting audio to text), col. 5 lines 27-41 describes converting audio to text due to bandwidth restrictions).
With respect to Claim 2, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the converting is in real-time (Mahajan et al. col. 10 lines 32-42 describes detecting network connectivity issues and changing the format/channels to use for transmitting the online meeting content in real-time.)
With respect to Claim 3, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the converting further comprising generating the text communication by an artificial intelligence model (Mahajan et al. col. 8 lines 66-67 and col. 9 lines 1-8 describes a trained machine learning TTS and SST models stored locally within the storage devices and/or remotely through third party.)
With respect to Claim 4, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the audio communication is converted to the text communication prior to receipt by the user device (Mahajan et al. col. 14 describes audio is transformed to text prior to being transmitted to the recipient system.)
With respect to Claim 5, Mahajan et al. disclose
Non-transitory computer-readable storage media having computer-executable instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors (Mahajan et al. col. 17 lines 21-31 describes processors and computer readable hardware storage/media to perform detecting connectivity problem and changing content format) to:
communicating an audio communication to a user device (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 510 Establish communications with client(s) over a first channel using a first protocol, col. 2 lines 7-13 describes User Datagram protocol (UDP) is desired over Transmission Control protocol (TCP) for audio and video since it is faster than TPC and TCP is desired over UDP for text because it is more reliable than UDP);
determine that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 530 monitor network connectivity to identify network connectivity problem, col. 5 lines 25-41 describes managing online meetings and communications, converting audio to text in response to detecting connectivity issues (e.g., poor connection, interruptions in connection, bandwidth restrictions, etc.), col. 7 lines 8-16 monitoring network connectivity to identify and assess network connectivity issues associated with variations in bandwidth constraints for transmitting the online meeting content over the network connections and to track packet transmissions to identify, detect and quantify connectivity issues that could negatively impact the quality of transmitting and/or rendering the online meeting content subject to potential packet loss and/or jitter), and
based on determining that the user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection, convert the audio communication into a text communication corresponding to the audio communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Modify format convert Audio/Text (i.e., converting audio to text), col. 5 lines 27-41 describes converting audio to text due to bandwidth restrictions).
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 user device (Mahajan et al. col. 11 lines 42-48 describes displaying text on a display.)
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 (Mahajan et al. col. 17 lines 21-31 describes processors and computer readable hardware storage/media to perform detecting connectivity problem and changing content format) comprising:
receiving an audio message (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 510 Establish communications with client(s) over first channel(s) using a first protocol, element 522 first protocol is text or audio, col. 2 lines 7-13 describes User Datagram protocol (UDP) is desired over Transmission Control protocol (TCP) for audio and video since it is faster than TCP and TCP is desired over UDP for text because it is more reliable than UDP);
determining that a first user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 530 monitor network connectivity to identify network connectivity problem, col. 5 lines 25-41 describes managing online meetings and communications, converting audio to text in response to detecting connectivity issues (e.g., poor connection, interruptions in connection, bandwidth restrictions, etc.), col. 7 lines 8-16 monitoring network connectivity to identify and assess network connectivity issues associated with variations in bandwidth constraints for transmitting the online meeting content over the network connections and to track packet transmissions to identify, detect and quantify connectivity issues that could negatively impact the quality of transmitting and/or rendering the online meeting content subject to potential packet loss and/or jitter),
based on determining that the first user device is associated with a bandwidth constrained connection converting the message from the audio message to a text message corresponding to the audio message (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Modify format convert Audio/Text (i.e., converting audio to text), col. 5 lines 27-41 describes converting audio to text due to bandwidth restrictions); and
communicating the text message (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 524 transmit data audio/text.)
For the following Claims 11-20, first form is interpreted as original form and second form is interpreted as converted form. For example, when audio is converted to text, audio is first form and text is second form.
With respect to Claim 11, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the first form is an audio communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Audio/Text, original format is audio and the audio is converted to text.)
With respect to Claim 12, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the second form is a text communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Audio/Text, original format is audio and the audio is converted to text.)
With respect to Claim 13, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein converting the message from the first form to the second form comprises converting the audio communication to the text communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Audio/Text, original format is audio and the audio is converted to text.)
With respect to Claim 14, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the first form is a text communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Text/Audio, original format is text and the text is converted to audio.)
With respect to Claim 15, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the second form is an audio communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Text/Audio, original format is text and the text is converted to audio.)
With respect to Claim 16, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein converting the message from the first form to the second form comprises converting the text communication to the audio communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 522 Text/Audio, original format is text and the text is converted to audio.)
With respect to Claim 17, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the converting further comprises generating the audio communication based on an artificial intelligence model associated with a first user (Mahajan et al. col. 8 lines 66-67 and col. 9 lines 1-8 describes a trained machine learning TTS and SST models stored locally within the storage devices and/or remotely through third party, col. 13 lines 23-46 describes extracting speech attribute information from a sender, using these extracted speech attribute information in converting the text back into audio of the same/similar style. See col. 14 lines 56-67 and col. 15 lines 1-4.)
With respect to Claim 18, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the artificial intelligence model is generated based on a set of audio recordings associated with the first user (Mahajan et al. col. 8 lines 66-67 and col. 9 lines 1-8 describes a trained machine learning TTS and SST models stored locally within the storage devices and/or remotely through third party, col. 13 lines 23-46 describes extracting speech attribute information from a sender, using these extracted speech attribute information in converting the text back into audio of the same/similar style. See col. 14 lines 56-67 and col. 15 lines 1-4.)
With respect to Claim 19, Mahajan et al. disclose
wherein the audio communication generated based on the artificial intelligence model comprises a set of vocal sounds and patterns associated with the first user (Mahajan et al. col. 8 lines 66-67 and col. 9 lines 1-8 describes a trained machine learning TTS and SST models stored locally within the storage devices and/or remotely through third party, col. 13 lines 23-46 describes extracting speech attribute information from a sender, using these extracted speech attribute information in converting the text back into audio of the same/similar style. See col. 14 lines 56-67 and col. 15 lines 1-4.)
With respect to Claim 20, Mahajan et al.
further comprising determining that the audio communication is a genuine audio communication (Mahajan et al. Fig. 5 element 520 describes receive client data over first channel with first protocol (e.g., text), element 522 converting the original text to audio, element 524 transmit text. The limitation of Claim 20 is interpreted in light of [0049] of the present specification. Paragraph [0049] discloses “If the text communication originated from the mobile originating, the resulting converted audio communication would be determined to be a genuine audio communication.” Mahajan et al. discloses receiving text communication originated from the sender’s device, converting the received the received text to audio. The resulting converted audio in Mahajan is determined to be a genuine audio communication.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Mahajan et al. (US 11,044,287 B1) 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.)
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’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.
13. 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.
14. 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