DETAILED ACTION
This Communication is a First Action on the Merits (FAOM). Claims 1-22, as originally filed, are pending and have been considered as follows.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4, 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 4 and 5 both recite an automotive assistant. It is unclear as to whether the recitation is to a single automotive assistant or are there different automotive assistants being utilized.
Claim 10 recites in part determining that said intravehicular conferee is oriented to direct speech towards a particular zone, receiving a trigger signal, and, in response to said trigger signal, causing a change in an extent of communication between said intravehicular conferee extravehicular conferees that have been assigned to zones other than said particular zone.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 7-9, 14, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ZILBERMAN et al (2020/0275207 A1).
As per Claim 1, Zilberman teaches a method comprising providing communication between an intravehicular conferee [IC] who is in a vehicle and first and second extravehicular conferees [EC] who are outside said vehicle (Page 8, Paragraphs [0095] and [0097]; Page 10, Paragraph [0112]). (Note: In paragraph [0095], Zilberman describes a system and method of providing private and hands-free audible communication within a space. In paragraph [009], Zilberman indicates that the space may be among other things a vehicle)
(Note: In paragraph [0112], Zilberman describes managing various types of audio sessions [e.g. unilateral – music playback, television and bilateral – phone/video calls/conference calls or voice control/command sessions]. A normal phone call consists of two parties [i.e. calling and called parties] where as a conference call requires a minimum of three participants. In the conference call scenario described by Zilberman with a single party being in a vehicle in order to have a conference at least two extravehicular conferees who are outside said vehicle must be participating)
Zilberman also teaches wherein providing said communication comprises causing speech by said first extravehicular conferee to originate from a first zone in said vehicle and causing speech by said second extravehicular conferee to originate from a second zone in said vehicle, wherein said first and second zones are volumes of space in a cabin of said vehicle (Figures 4B and 4C; Private Zone [PZ] & Bright Zone [BZ]: Page 8, Paragraph [0103]; Page 9, Paragraph [0107] and [0109]; Page 10, Paragraph [0111]; Page 18, Paragraph [0174] and [0177]; Page 19, Paragraph [0179]).
(Note: As shown in Figures 4B and 4C, a vehicle conference participant is being provided conference speech in an area broken down in a plurality of zones which include a private zone [PZ], a bright zone [BZ] and a dark zone [DZ]. In paragraph [0107], Zilberman describes a transducer selector module responsible for selecting the transducer [i.e. speaker] best suited for providing the IC the highest quality sound field by utilizing three dimensional [3D] sensory data)
(Note: In paragraphs [0109] and [0111], Zilberman describes an audio signal generator that generates the audio field only in the vicinity of the IC so that the IC privately hears the audio transmitted to him and prohibiting other in the vicinity from hearing the sound [i.e. whisper or sidebar conversation])
(Note: In paragraph [0174], Zilberman describes an acoustic bright zone [BZ] near the intravehicular conferee’s [IC] head where transmitted signals form an audible sound field that can be heard by the IC. Zilberman indicates that the BZ is surrounded by DZs where the transmitted signal forms an audible acoustic wave but the sound pressure level [SPL] is low enough to not be heard by human ears)
(Note: In paragraph [0174], Zilberman also describes a private zone [PZ] which includes a region between the BZ and the transducer array where ultra-sonic acoustic waves form audible sound. It is clear that within the vehicle that are three different zone types relative to a vehicle occupant. In paragraph [0177], Zilberman describes the generation of a confined sound field surrounding the IC’s head. In paragraph [0177], Zilberman describes how the BZ creates localized audible sound bubbles around each of the IC’s ears [i.e. two distinct zones of space in a cabin of said vehicle])
As per Claim 2, Zilberman teaches wherein causing speech by said first extravehicular conferee to originate at said first zone comprises assigning a first set of loudspeaker weights to said first extravehicular conferee and applying said weights to loudspeakers in said vehicle while said first extravehicular conferee is speaking and wherein causing speech by said second extra-vehicular conferee to originate from said second zone comprises assigning a second set of loudspeaker weights to said second extra-vehicular conferee and applying said weights to said loudspeakers while said second extra-vehicular conferee is speaking as described in Claim 1.
(Note: In paragraph [0155], Zilberman describes an object classifier that associates each object type with acoustical reflection and absorption parameters. Zilberman also describes a transducer selector simulating/calculating the attenuation of the sound field [i.e. weighing] for each path between a transducer, a reflective object and the IC. Zilberman indicates the transducer selector is configured to employ a number of acoustic simulation/estimation techniques to determine optimal acoustic field attenuation)
(Note: As described in paragraph [0109], the BZ is an audio field carrying audio that can only be heard by the IC which allow speech associated with a first EC to be rendered in the PZ while speech associated with a second EC to be rendered in the BZ. In paragraph [0154], Zilberman indicates the private sound region is defines as a region where outside of it the sound intensity is reduced by [e.g. 30 dB] allowing the sound to be noticeable within close proximity to the region but increasingly difficult to perceive further away)
As per Claim 5, Zilberman teaches providing said extravehicular conferees with access to an automotive assistant within said vehicle (Page 8, Paragraphs [0095] and [0097]; Page 10, Paragraphs [0112] and [0115]; Page 15, Paragraph [0147]). (Note: In paragraphs [0095] and [0097]; Zilberman describes providing private and hands-free communication in a space and indicates that each space site may possibly be a room, office or vehicle which have the ability to be in audible communication)
(Note: In paragraphs [0112] and [0113], Zilberman describes an audio session manager [i.e. automotive assistant] managing bilateral communication sessions [phone/conference calls]. In paragraph [0115], Zilberman describes a distributed system allowing the connection of conferees located in three geographically dispersed rooms and a conferee in a vehicle. In paragraph [0147], Zilberman describes a gesture detection module functioning as a wake module and uses the example of a user utter a keywork [i.e. Call George] to have an assistant locate George’s contact information and initiate a phone call to George without any additional user action)
(Note: In a scenario where an attendee is in one of the rooms and is seeking to contact an attendee in a vehicle. The attendee in one of the rooms can use a voice command to initiate a call to the attendee who is in the vehicle. The call is routed to the automotive assistant located in the vehicle which establishes the connection between the external attendee and the attendee in the vehicle)
As per Claim 7, Zilberman teaches causing speech by said intravehicular conferee to be audible to said first extravehicular conferee and causing said speech to be inaudible to all other extravehicular conferees as described in Claim 1. (See the BZ described in Claim 1 which allows sidebar/whisper conversation to occur between two participants)
As per Claim 8, Zilberman teaches receiving an audible signal by said intravehicular conferee, based on said audible signal, identifying a zone, causing speech by said intravehicular conferee to be audible to an extravehicular conferee assigned to said zone, and causing speech by said intravehicular conferee to be inaudible to all other extravehicular conferees as described in Claims 1 and 7. (Note: In paragraph [0144], Zilberman describes a gesture detection module that detects one or more vocal gestures with one or more predetermined commands [i.e. sidebar/private/whisper conversation])
As per Claim 9, Zilberman teaches determining that said intravehicular conferee is directing speech towards a particular zone, receiving a trigger signal, and, in response to said trigger signal, causing speech by said intravehicular conferee to be audible only to an extravehicular conferee assigned to said zone as described in Claim 8.
As per Claim 14, Zilberman teaches providing communication between said first and second extravehicular conferees as described in Claim 1. (Bilateral Sessions: Page 10, Paragraph [0112])
As per Claim 15, Zilberman teaches wherein said intravehicular conferee is one of a plurality of intravehicular conferees in said vehicle and wherein said method further comprises providing, to said extravehicular conferees, information for enabling each of said extravehicular conferees to determine which of said intravehicular conferees is speaking, said information having been derived from directions-of-arrival of sound waves launched by said intravehicular conferees (Page 3, Paragraph [0033]; Page 4, Paragraph [0049]; Page 10, Paragraph [0114]; Page 12, Paragraph [0127]).
(Note: In paragraph [0033], Zilberman describes a user detection module working in conjunction with 3D sensor modules to determine spatial locations of at least one user [i.e. one of a plurality of intravehicular conferees in said vehicle]. In paragraph [0049], Zilberman describes one or more 3D sensor modules [TDSM] – 3D camera, radar, sonar, light detection and ranging [LIDAR] – that provide sensory data about the arrangement of elements in a 3D space. In paragraph [0049], Zilberman also describes a mapping module indicating the location of identified elements within coverage zones)
(Note: In paragraph [0114], Zilberman describes a microphone array capturing user speech which the input sound beam former uses to determine the directions of the received sound which is then associated as arriving from different directions associated with the mapped user locations determined by the user detection module. In paragraph [0127], Zilberman describes leveraging mapping data to accurately determine the user whose voice is received by the audio input sensor)
As per Claim 18, Zilberman teaches a method as described in Claim 1. Zilberman also teaches audio-zone synthesizer (Figure 1A – Reference 110; Page 8, Paragraphs [0096] and [0097]); an acoustic goniometer (Figure 1A – Reference 120; Page 8, Paragraphs [0096] and [0097]) and a balancing circuit (Figure 1A – Reference 500; Page 8, Paragraphs [0097] and [0098]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 6, 10-13, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZILBERMAN et al (2020/0275207 A1) in view of Adlersberg et al (2020/0279567 A1).
As per Claim 3, Zilberman teaches the method of Claim 1; but does not teach wherein causing speech by said first extravehicular conferee to originate at said first zone and causing speech by said second extra-vehicular conferee to originate at said second zone comprises assigning a first set of loudspeaker weights to said first extravehicular conferee and a second set of loudspeaker weights to said second extra-vehicular conferee and applying a superposition of said first and second sets of loudspeaker weights to said speakers while said first and second extra-vehicular conferee are speaking simultaneously.
However, Adlersberg teaches wherein causing speech by said first extravehicular conferee to originate at said first zone and causing speech by said second extra-vehicular conferee to originate at said second zone comprises assigning a first set of loudspeaker weights to said first extravehicular conferee and a second set of loudspeaker weights to said second extra-vehicular conferee and applying a superposition of said first and second sets of loudspeaker weights to said speakers while said first and second extra-vehicular conferee are speaking simultaneously (Figure 1 – References 160 and 165; Page 11, Paragraph [0096]; Page 12, Paragraphs [0104] and [0105]).
(Note: In paragraph [0096], Adlersberg describes a meeting moderator bot [MMB] responsible for monitoring audio uttered or spoken by meeting/conference participants. In paragraph [0104], Adlersberg describes a Double-Talk/Multi-Talk Detector Unit responsible for monitoring the audio of conference participants and detect any instance of concurrent double-talk or concurrent triple-talk or concurrent multi-talk. Detection of this may cause the MMB to generate and convey warnings regarding unacceptable behavior)
(Note: In paragraph [0105], Adlersberg indicates that in response to detected instances of Double-Talk/Multi-Talk, the MMB may automatically mute participant(s) upon the satisfaction of predefined criteria. The language recites the applying of loudspeaker weights to first and second EC’s respectively and when the first and second EC’s engage in Double-Talk/Multi-Talk the loudspeaker weights are super-positioned [i.e. they mute each other resulting in silence])
(Note: The superposition of weighted audio values results in muting or cancellation [destructive interference] when two or more sound waves combine in such a way that their peaks and troughs align in opposite phases. Specifically, when one sound wave is at its maximum positive amplitude (compression) and another wave is at its maximum negative amplitude (rarefaction) simultaneously, they cancel each other out, resulting in a reduction of amplitude or complete silence)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
As per Claims 4 and 19, the combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg teaches causing speech by an automotive assistant to originate within a third zone in said vehicle, wherein said third zone is a volume in said cabin. (Note: In paragraph [0104], Adlersberg describes the generation and conveying of notifications and warnings to conference participants engaged in Double-Talk/Multi-Talk. As shown in Figure 4C, there are two BZs and 2 PZs. Having the Double-Talk/Multi-Talk of the users to be in PZ1 and PZ2 respectively and having speech by an automotive assistant to originate within either of BZ1 or BZ2 reads on the third zone recited in claim)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and apparatus taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
As per Claim 6, the combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg teaches selecting said first extra-vehicular conferee to be an automotive assistant as described in Claims 1 and 5 above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
As per Claim 10, the combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg teaches determining that said intravehicular conferee is oriented to direct speech towards a particular zone, receiving a trigger signal, and, in response to said trigger signal, causing a change in an extent of communication between said intravehicular conferee extravehicular conferees that have been assigned to zones other than said particular zone.
(Note: Zilberman describes determining a conferee orientation and the directing of speech as described in Claim 1. The Double-Talk/Multi-Talk Detector Unit described by Adlersberg identifies disruptive behavior [i.e. trigger signal] which causes a change [i.e. muting] in an extent of communication between said intravehicular conferee extravehicular conferees that have been assigned to zones other than said particular zone)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
As per Claim 11, the combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg teaches in response to receiving a haptic input while said intravehicular conferee is directing speech towards a particular zone or oriented to direct speech towards said particular zone, causing speech by said intravehicular conferee to be audible to an extravehicular conferee assigned to said zone and to be inaudible to all other extravehicular conferees (Page 12, Paragraph [0129]). (Note: In paragraph [0129], Zilberman describes a system user interface that includes a keyboard, touchscreen or gesture-based detection that the Examiner is considering as examples of haptic input)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
As per Claim 12, the combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg teaches restoring communication with said second extravehicular conferee after having disabled communication with said second extravehicular conferee (Adlersberg: Page 12, Paragraph [0105]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
As per Claim 13, the combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg teaches determining that said intravehicular conferee is directing speech towards a public zone and restoring communication with all extravehicular conferees who are not in communication with said intravehicular conferee. (Note: The gesture detection module described by Zilberman [See paragraphs 0145]is responsive to one or more gestures [physical or verbal] to execute one or more commands/operations [i.e. restoring communication with all extravehicular conferees who are not in communication with said intravehicular conferee])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
As per Claim 17, the combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg teaches wherein providing communication between an intravehicular conferee who is in a vehicle and first and second extravehicular conferees who are outside said vehicle comprises causing a reduction in an extent to which said second extravehicular conferee is able to communicate with said intravehicular conferee while said intravehicular conferee is speaking with said first extravehicular conferee.
(Note: The Double Talk/Multi-Talk detector taught by Adlersberg identifies behavior [i.e. second extravehicular conferee engaging in Double Talk] which serves as a catalyst to remediate disruptive behavior [i.e. muting second extravehicular conferee for some period of time - reduction in an extent to which said second extravehicular conferee is able to communicate])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Zilberman with the method taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
Claim(s) 16 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZILBERMAN et al (2020/0275207 A1) in view of Coulas et al (2007/0091830 A1).
As per Claims 16 and 20, Zilberman teaches the method and apparatus of Claims 1 and 18; but does not teach wherein providing communication between an intravehicular conferee who is in a vehicle and first and second extravehicular conferees who are outside said vehicle comprises causing placing said second extravehicular conferee to be placed on hold while said intravehicular conferee is speaking with said first extravehicular conferee; and temporarily excluding one or more extravehicular conferees from communicating with said intravehicular conferee.
However, Coulas reaches placing said second extravehicular conferee to be placed on hold while said intravehicular conferee is speaking with said first extravehicular conferee; and temporarily excluding one or more extravehicular conferees from communicating with said intravehicular conferee (Page 2, Paragraph [0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and apparatus taught by Zilberman with the method and apparatus taught by Coulas to prevent individuals who may be security risks from hearing sensitive internal discussions, being made aware of team dynamics, or learning confidential information that should not be disclosed.
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZILBERMAN et al (2020/0275207 A1) in view of Chauhan (2015/0256795 A1).
As per Claim 21, Zilberman teaches the apparatus of Claim 18; but does not teach a cloud-based component that hosts a conference between said extravehicular conferees and said intravehicular conferee, said cloud-based component being configured to provide said on-board component with signals from each of said extravehicular conferees to enable said on-board component to distinguish said signals for assigning said audio zones to said corresponding ones of said extravehicular conferees.
However, Chauhan teaches a cloud-based component that hosts a conference between said extravehicular conferees and said intravehicular conferee, said cloud-based component being configured to provide said on-board component with signals from each of said extravehicular conferees to enable said on-board component to distinguish said signals for assigning said audio zones to said corresponding ones of said extravehicular conferees (Page 2, Paragraph [0032]; Page 6, Paragraph [0074]).
(Note: In paragraph [0032], Chauhan describes an online meeting server hosting meetings [i.e. conferences] on behalf of vehicle users and non-vehicle users. Chauhan indicates the online meeting server may be implemented as a server farm on a virtualized platform in the cloud; and that the online meeting server shares video and aggregates audio signals between participants. Modifying the apparatus and method taught by Zilberman to include the functionality described by Chauhan is found to read on the claimed language)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zilberman with the apparatus taught by Chauhan to allow participants to join from anywhere in the world, removing geographical barriers and often resulting in higher attendance rates compared to physical events while eliminating the need for expensive on-site equipment, maintenance, and travel expenses.
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZILBERMAN et al (2020/0275207 A1) in view of Adlersberg et al (2020/0279567 A1), and further in view of Chauhan (2015/0256795 A1).
As per Claim 22, Zilberman teaches the apparatus of Claim 18. Zilberman also teaches an automotive assistant as described in Claims 1 and 18; but does not teach a selective-muting circuit; wherein said selective-muting circuit temporarily excludes one or more extravehicular conferees from communicating with said intravehicular conferee in response to an instruction from said intravehicular conferee and restores communication with said one or more extravehicular conferees in response to another instruction from said intravehicular conferee.
However, Adlersberg teaches a selective-muting circuit; wherein said selective-muting circuit temporarily excludes one or more extravehicular conferees from communicating with said intravehicular conferee in response to an instruction from said intravehicular conferee and restores communication with said one or more extravehicular conferees in response to another instruction from said intravehicular conferee as described in Claims 3, 4 and 10 above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zilberman with the apparatus taught by Adlersberg to create destructive interference (e.g. muting or cancellation) by leveraging linear addition to create "anti-noise," where a peak of one wave aligns with a trough of another to yield silence which is preferred in active noise control systems to create a quieter environment by subtracting energy rather than just blocking it.
The combination of Zilberman and Adlersberg does not teach wherein said cloud-based component hosts a conference between said extravehicular conferees and said intravehicular conferee, said cloud-based component being configured to provide said on-board component with signals from each of said extravehicular conferees to enable said on-board component to distinguish said signals for assigning said audio zones to said corresponding ones of said extravehicular conferees.
However, Chauhan teaches wherein said cloud-based component hosts a conference between said extravehicular conferees and said intravehicular conferee, said cloud-based component being configured to provide said on-board component with signals from each of said extravehicular conferees to enable said on-board component to distinguish said signals for assigning said audio zones to said corresponding ones of said extravehicular conferees as described in Claim 21.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zilberman and Adlersberg with the apparatus taught by Chauhan to allow participants to join from anywhere in the world, removing geographical barriers and often resulting in higher attendance rates compared to physical events while eliminating the need for expensive on-site equipment, maintenance, and travel expenses.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. VERBEKE et al (2022/0109705 A1), MCDYSAN et al (2013/0051543 A1), Adlersberg et al (11,501,780 B2), Fardig et al (2020/0314158 A1), SHANI et al (2021/0211823 A1), Millington (6,172,641), Slusar (2013/0253834 A1), Wolverton et al (2014/0136187 A1), Noguchi (2024/0313992 A1), KIM (2019/0018364 A1), BARRETT et al (2015/0056970 A1) and Donaldson (2015/0036847 A1). Each of these describes systems and methods of implementing conferencing within diverse environments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHARYE POPE whose telephone number is (571)270-5587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 4PM.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
KHARYE POPE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2693
/KHARYE POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693