DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1-3, 7, 10-14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Afrasiabi, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0286625 (hereinafter Afrasiabi) in view of Farina et al, U.S. Patent No. 12,155,729 (hereinafter Farina).
Regarding claim 1, Afrasiabi discloses a method for providing on-video content during a video presentation by at least one user, the method comprising, during execution of one or more applications by an electronic device (from Figure 1, see 110) associated with at least a display unit (from Figure 1, see 102) and a capture element (from Figure 1, see 103) having a field of view including the at least one user:
generating in a screen area (from Figure 7, see 115) of the display unit a first image layer comprising content associated with at least one of the one or more applications (from Figure 7, see 120);
generating in the screen area of the display unit a second image layer comprising a content window (from Figure 7, see 220);
generating a location of the content window within the screen area, the location within the screen area being aligned relative to a position of the capture element connected to the electronic device (from paragraph 0052, see a script within a field 220 may be displayed in a position near the presenter’s camera 103),
wherein content displayed in the content window is provided in accordance with the at least one of the one or more applications (from Figure 7, see 240), and
wherein the location of the content window (from Figure 7, see 220) within the screen area (from Figure 7, see 115) is arranged at a position (from paragraph 0007, see The content may be customizable as to location on the digital overlay screen or may have pre-determined locations) being:
dependent at least in part on a position of the capture element (from Figure 1, see 103); and
at least partially overlapping the first image layer (from abstract, see the digital overlay screen may overlay on a video feed of the telecommunications without distorting said feed).
Further regarding claim 1, Afrasiabi does not teach the content
is accessible within an environment of the at least one of the one or more applications. All the same, Farina discloses the content is accessible within an environment of the at least one of the one or more applications (from Figure 11, see 1006). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Afrasiabi wherein the content is accessible within an environment of the at least one of the one or more applications as taught by Farina. This modification would have improved efficiency of the meeting by ensuring the participants are on the same page at the same time as suggested by Farina.
Regarding claim 2, Afrasiabi discloses automatically revising the content according to a user-preferred parameter, wherein the user-preferred parameter comprises a time limit for the video presentation (from paragraph 0049, see Moreover, different fields or boxes 220 may be configured with different parameters. For example, a user may log into the digital overlay application 101, create an event 200 and upload one field 220 of content 240 comprising scrolling functions and three fields 220 static in position. Additionally, the speech and text parameters may be pre-set at a desired pace (like a teleprompter) so as to initiate the scrolling function for a field 220 comprising a script for a speech once the user begins a speech or live presentation).
Regarding claim 3, Afrasiabi discloses automatically revising the content comprises any one or more of: automatically adding additional content to satisfy the time limit, automatically increasing a scrolling speed of the content on the display unit to satisfy the time limit, removing content to satisfy the time limit, decreasing the scrolling speed (from paragraph 0049, see stop the scrolling function of a particular field 220 based on a timer elapsing, an interaction with the user interface 115 indicating an instruction to stop scrolling, latency or no audio being detected, or the user going off script by way of recognizing the voice has departed from the pre-set speech so the speech pauses) of the content to satisfy the time limit, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 7, Afrasiabi discloses the method of claim 1,
further comprising providing an audience member with one or more applications (from Figure 1, see Network conferencing platform) for viewing the video presentation (from Figure 1, see Video feed 120) on an audience member electronic device (from Figure 1, see 150) that is associated with a second display unit;
generating in a screen area of the second display unit a content-viewing window; wherein the video presentation is provided in the content-viewing window in accordance with the at least one of the one or more applications (from paragraph 0028, see the content 240 projected from the digital overlay screen 112 is visible to the presenter (and any invited associates who are helping or communicating with the presenter by pre-approval),);
generating and displaying a feedback input portion of the content-viewing window (From Figure 6, see Associate may view/edit content for event);
accepting a feedback input from the audience member (from Figure 6, see Associate may modify/add);
automatically transmitting the feedback input to the electronic device (from paragraph 0027, see transmitted to the presenter during the event); and
displaying the feedback input to the user via the content window (from paragraph 0028, see visible to the presenter).
Regarding claim 10, Afrasiabi discloses the content is displayed in the content window according to one or more parameters (from Figure 6, see 610) set via user input from the at least one user.
Regarding claim 11, Afrasiabi discloses a system for providing on-video content during a video presentation by at least one user, the system comprising:
an electronic device (from Figure 1, see 110) comprising a processor (from Figure 1, see 109) functionally linked to at least a display unit (from Figure 1, see 102) and a capture element (from Figure 1, see 103) having a field of view including the at least one user,
wherein the processor is configured, during execution of one or more applications via the electronic device, to:
generate in a screen area (from Figure 7, see 115) of the display unit a first image layer comprising content associated with at least one of the one or more applications (from Figure 7, see 120);
generate in the screen area of the display unit a second image layer comprising a content window (from Figure 7, see 220);
generate a location of the content window within the screen area, the location within the screen area being aligned relative to a position of the capture element connected to the electronic device (from paragraph 0052, see a script within a field 220 may be displayed in a position near the presenter’s camera 103),
wherein the location of the content window (from Figure 7, see 220) within the screen area (from Figure 7, see 115) is arranged at a position (from paragraph 0007, see The content may be customizable as to location on the digital overlay screen or may have pre-determined locations) being:
dependent at least in part on the position of the capture element; and
at least partially overlapping the first image layer (from abstract, see the digital overlay screen may overlay on a video feed of the telecommunications without distorting said feed).
Further regarding claim 11, Afrasiabi does not teach the content
is accessible within an environment of the at least one of the one or more applications. All the same, Farina discloses the content is accessible within an environment of the at least one of the one or more applications (from Figure 11, see 1006). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Afrasiabi wherein the content is accessible within an environment of the at least one of the one or more applications as taught by Farina. This modification would have improved efficiency of the meeting by ensuring the participants are on the same page at the same time as suggested by Farina.
Regarding claim 12, Afrasiabi discloses the at least one of the
one or more applications comprises a web conferencing platform (from paragraph 0024, see network conferencing program 100 may be Zoom, Microsoft Teams, BlueJeans, FaceTime, Skype, Webex Meetings, GoTo Meeting, or any other program which allows individuals to video conference efficiently and in real-time to participants on remote devices in remote locations).
Claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 2.
Claim 14 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 3.
Claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 11.
3. Claims 4-6 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Afrasiabi combined with Farina in view of Cossar et al, U.S. Patent No. 12,052,299 (hereinafter Cossar).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Afrasiabi and Farina does not teach automatically ascertaining a location of the at least one user relative to the capture element. All the same, Cossar discloses automatically ascertaining a location of the at least one user relative to the capture element (from Figure 4B, see Lens Too). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of Afrasiabi and Farina with automatically ascertaining a location of the at least one user relative to the capture element as taught by Cossar. This modification would have made the experience more effective by providing proper framing as suggested by Cossar.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Afrasiabi and Farina does not teach automatically detecting a performance metric of the at least one user via the capture element, analyzing the performance metric of the at least one user, and automatically providing feedback to the at least one user. All the same, Cossar discloses automatically detecting a performance metric of the at least one user via the capture element, analyzing the performance metric of the at least one user, and automatically providing feedback to the at least one user (from Figure 3D, see eye contact). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of Afrasiabi and Farina with automatically detecting a performance metric of the a least one user via the capture element, analyzing the performance metric of the at least one user, and automatically providing feedback to the at least one user as taught by Cossar. This modification would have made the experience more effective by projecting confidence as suggested by Cossar.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Afrasiabi and Cossar discloses the performance metric comprises any one or more of a use of frequency of filler words, the at least one user’s tone or confidence, a speed or pace of the presentation, the at least one user’s adherence to the content, and an amount of the at least one user eye contact (from Figure 3D of Cossar, see eye contact) with the capture element.
Claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 4.
Claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 5.
Claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 6.
4. Claims 8, 9, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Afrasiabi combined with Farina in further view of Christmas et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0318883 (hereinafter Christmas).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Afrasiabi and Farina does not teach:
an audience member capture element having a field of view including the audience member;
capturing an audience sentiment metric from the audience member via the audience member capture element;
automatically analyzing the audience sentiment metric;
automatically generating a performance score, wherein the performance score is dependent on the audience sentiment metric;
and displaying the performance score to the at least one user via the content window.
All the same, Christmas discloses:
an audience member capture element having a field of view including the audience member (from paragraph 0066, see attendee devices 1320 may comprise one or more sensors 1322. For example, sensors 1322 may comprise one or more cameras, microphones, thermal imaging sensors, accelerometers, compasses, etc. The sensors 1322 may be configured to detect actions of the attendees, capture feedback from the attendees, and/or the like. In various embodiments, the sensors 1322 may comprise a camera which captures still images or video of attendees. The sensors 1322 may comprise a microphone which detects audio, such as words, tones, or sounds. The sensors 1322 may comprise a thermal imaging (e.g., infrared) sensor which detects the number and/or locations of persons in view of the sensor);
capturing an audience sentiment metric from the audience member via the audience member capture element (from paragraph 0068, see the sensor data processing software may comprise facial recognition software. The facial recognition software may be configured to detect where the attendee's eyes are looking, or the number or location of persons or faces in view of the sensor 1322 (e.g., a camera). The facial recognition software may detect particular locations on attendee devices 1320 where the attendees are looking, which may indicate which portion of the content the attendees are currently viewing (or not viewing). For example, a presenter may be talking about a first bullet point on a slide for several minutes, but the facial recognition software may detect that 90% of attendees were viewing a subsequent bullet point, indicating that the attendees were moving faster through the content than the presenter. Additionally, the facial recognition software may determine what portion of the attendees are looking at the attendee devices 1320 versus a different location entirely (e.g., five attendees were present and one was looking at attendee device 1320);
automatically analyzing the audience sentiment metric; automatically generating a performance score (from Figure 8, see SCORE), wherein the performance score is dependent on the audience sentiment metric; and
displaying the performance score to the at least one user via the content window (from paragraph 0067, see In various embodiments, one or more of presenting device 1310, attendee devices 1320, or portable storage device 1100 may comprise sensor data processing software. The sensor data processing software may be configured to analyze the data captured by the sensors 1322 and present the data to the presenter. The analyzed data may be presented to the presenter using any suitable technique. For example, the analyzed data may be presented to the presenter in real time via presentation UI 1315. The analyzed data may also be presented in a generated report and transmitted via email, SMS, or the like).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of Afrasiabi and Farina with an audience member capture element having a field of view including the audience member; capturing an audience sentiment metric from the audience member via the audience member capture element; automatically analyzing the audience sentiment metric; automatically generating a performance score, wherein the performance score is dependent on the audience sentiment metric; and displaying the performance score to the at least one user via the content window as taught by Christmas. This modification would have improved the system’s convenience by allowing the presenter to gauge the interest of attendees as suggested by Christmas.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of references discloses wherein the audience sentiment metric comprises an amount of time the audience member's eyes are directed toward the content-viewing window (from paragraph 0068 of Christmas, see the sensor data processing software may comprise facial recognition software. The facial recognition software may be configured to detect where the attendee's eyes are looking, or the number or location of persons or faces in view of the sensor 1322 (e.g., a camera). The facial recognition software may detect particular locations on attendee devices 1320 where the attendees are looking, which may indicate which portion of the content the attendees are currently viewing (or not viewing). For example, a presenter may be talking about a first bullet point on a slide for several minutes, but the facial recognition software may detect that 90% of attendees were viewing a subsequent bullet point, indicating that the attendees were moving faster through the content than the presenter. Additionally, the facial recognition software may determine what portion of the attendees are looking at the attendee devices 1320 versus a different location entirely (e.g., five attendees were present and one was looking at attendee device 1320), a number of questions asked verbally by the audience member, a number of questions asked in a chat feature of the one or more applications, a time the audience member spends in front of the capture element, a number of times the audience member looks away from the content-viewing window, a total amount of time the audience member spends looking away from the content-viewing window during the video presentation, the audience member’s participation in polls, the audience member time spent speaking as compared to the at least one user’s time spent speaking, or a combination thereof.
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 8.
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 9.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant argues that Afrasiabi does not teach generating a location of the content window within the screen area, the location within the screen area being aligned relative to a position of the capture element connected to the electronic device. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Because Afrasiabi discloses a script within a field 220 may be displayed in a position near the presenter’s camera 103 (see paragraph 0052), Afrasiabi discloses generating a location of the content window within the screen area, the location within the screen area being aligned relative to a position of the capture element connected to the electronic device.
Conclusion
6. Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLISA ANWAH whose telephone number is 571-272-7533. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8.30 AM to 6 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn Edwards can be reached on 571-270-7136. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications and 571-273-8300 for After Final communications.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2600.
Olisa Anwah
Patent Examiner
June 24, 2026
/OLISA ANWAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights