Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 23-47 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 23-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 23 now recites the step of “providing the plurality of overview video streams and captured audio signals as inputs to a machine learning model, wherein the machine learning model is configured to analyze the overview video streams… to identify, based on the plurality of overview video streams and the captured audio signals, a particular scenario, from among a plurality of predetermined scenario types, associated with the video conferencing space…”. In the remarks, Applicant indicates that support for the claim amendments can for example be found in [0037, 0042, 0043, 0047, 0061-0066]. However, a careful review of these paragraphs along with the remainder of the disclosure as originally filed fails to show adequate support for these newly claimed features. Specifically, there is no support for a machine learning model that uses video streams and audio streams as inputs to identify a particular scenario from among a plurality of predetermined types.
In [0046] it is disclosed that the vision pipeline is pre-trained with a training set of video and audio data adapted to a special-purpose video conferencing space for a special-purpose scenario. The vision pipeline may for example be finetuned for a classroom, a workshop, etc. Further, in [0047] it is disclosed that the vision pipeline is adapted to aggregate and process audio signals and combine voice classification and characteristics with other information gleaned from image data to generate a comprehensive understanding of the video conferencing space and all detected objects, such that the virtual director can create an automated television studio production. In [0048], it is disclosed that the virtual director frames objects of interest according to a predetermined rule set thereby allowing the focus stream to be updated in real time. In [0061-0066], special purpose scenarios are disclosed and again the specification indicates that the vision pipeline unit is pre-trained with training data adapted to a special purpose video conference space, including a classroom, a workshop, etc. It is also disclosed for each scenario how shots are directed. However, while it is clear that the specification discloses how the system operates in a given scenario, and that the vision pipeline is pre-trained with training data adapted to a special purpose space so as to define how the system operates in a given scenario, it is silent with respect to the machine learning model using video streams and audio streams as inputs to identify a particular scenario from among a plurality of predetermined scenario types. Accordingly, this feature is considered to be new matter.
Conclusion
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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN W MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-7353. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Colleen Fauz can be reached at 571-272-1667. 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.
/JOHN W MILLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2422