DETAILED ACTION
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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/760,469 filed on 07/01/2024.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for domestic priority to which claims benefit of Application 63/524,498 06/30/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 11/01/2024 and 01/08/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
8. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walton et al. (US 2021/0075906 A1); in view of Einziger et al. (US 2018/0329671 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Walton teaches a computerized method for real-time detection of millisecond gaps in live audio streams ([paragraph 0020, 0030, 0047-0048] describes a method for real-time detects of millisecond gaps in live audio conversation (e.g. audio streams)), the method comprising:
receiving, by a first mobile computing device, a data representation of a live audio signal corresponding to a live event via a wireless network ([paragraph 0016-0017, 0027-0030, 0033] describes receiving by a client computing device (e.g. a first mobile computing device) a data of live audio signal related to a live chat (e.g. event) via wireless network);
processing, by the first mobile computing device, the data representation of the live audio signal corresponding to the live event into a live audio stream ([paragraph 0016-0017, 0027-0030, 0047-0048] describes processing by the client computing device (e.g. the first mobile computing device) the data of live audio signal related to the live chat (e.g. event) into a live audio conversation (e.g. audio stream);
transmitting, by the first mobile computing device, the live audio stream to a second mobile computing device communicatively coupled to the first mobile computing device ([paragraph 0016-0017, 0027-0030, 0047-0049] describes audio call between a user and participant and sending by the client computing device (e.g. the first mobile computing device) the live audio conversation (e.g. audio stream) to a participant computing device (e.g. a second mobile computing device));
detecting, by the second mobile computing device, a first gap in the received live audio stream ([paragraph 0047-0049] describes detecting by the participant computing device (e.g. a second mobile computing device) a gap by monitoring connection information of a client device for example during an audio call in the received live audio conversation (e.g. audio stream));
Walton doesn’t explicitly disclose calculating, by the second mobile computing device, at least one of a timestamp corresponding to the first gap in the received live audio stream or a duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Einziger discloses calculating, by the second mobile computing device, at least one of a timestamp corresponding to the first gap in the received live audio stream or a duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream ([paragraph 0030, 0054-0055, 0085-0086, 0094] describes device (first mobile computing device) is connected to client computing device (e.g. second mobile computing device) and calculating by client computing device (e.g. second mobile computing device) a timestamp related to gap or latency (e.g. a first gap) in the received audio stream or a duration of gap or latency in the received audio stream).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Walton to include calculating, by the second mobile computing device, at least one of a timestamp corresponding to the first gap in the received live audio stream or a duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream as taught by Einziger. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Walton in the Einziger system in order to capable of handling high listener traffic while delivering a high-quality audio experience to most or all listeners in real-time ([paragraph 0005] in Einziger).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method , wherein the duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream is less than 20 milliseconds (Einziger: [paragraph 0030, 0055] describes duration of the gap or the latency (e.g. the first gap) in the received live audio stream is less than 20 milliseconds).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Walton to include wherein the duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream is less than 20 milliseconds as taught by Einziger. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Walton in the Einziger system in order to receive a complete stream ([paragraph 0056] in Einziger).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method, wherein the duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream is less than 10 milliseconds (Einziger: [paragraph 0030, 0054-0055] describes duration of the gap or the latency (e.g. the first gap) in the received live audio stream is less than 10 milliseconds).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Walton to include wherein the duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream is less than 10 milliseconds as taught by Einziger. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Walton in the Einziger system in order to receive a complete stream ([paragraph 0056] in Einziger).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the , computerized method, wherein the duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream is less than 5 milliseconds(Einziger: [paragraph 0030, 0063, 0072] describes duration of the gap or the latency (e.g. the first gap) in the received live audio stream is less than Y milliseconds or 2.7 milliseconds).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Walton to include wherein the duration of the first gap in the received live audio stream is less than 5 milliseconds as taught by Einziger. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Walton in the Einziger system in order to receive a complete stream ([paragraph 0056] in Einziger).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method, further comprising: detecting, by the second mobile computing device, a second gap in the received live audio stream (Einziger: [paragraph 0030, 0048, 0097-0098] describes detecting by the client computing device (e.g. second mobile computing device) a second gap or second latency in the received live audio stream).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Walton to include detecting, by the second mobile computing device, a second gap in the received live audio stream as taught by Einziger. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Walton in the Einziger system in order to allow time for retransmitted data to arrive before the deadline ([paragraph 0056] in Einziger).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method, further comprising: calculating, by the second mobile computing device, at least one of a timestamp corresponding to the second gap in the received live audio stream or a duration of the second gap in the received live audio stream (Einziger: [paragraph 0030, 0048, 0054-0055, 0085-0086, 0094] describes calculating by client computing device (e.g. second mobile computing device) a timestamp related to second gap or second latency (e.g. a second gap) in the received audio stream or a duration of second gap or second latency (e.g. a second gap) in the received audio stream).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Walton to include calculating, by the second mobile computing device, at least one of a timestamp corresponding to the second gap in the received live audio stream or a duration of the second gap in the received live audio stream as taught by Einziger. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Walton in the Einziger system in order to capable of handling high listener traffic while delivering a high-quality audio experience to most or all listeners in real-time ([paragraph 0005] in Einziger).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method, further comprising: calculating, by the second mobile computing device, a rate of gaps corresponding to the received live audio stream (Einziger: [paragraph 0030, 0065-0066, 0088] describes calculating by client computing device (e.g. second mobile computing device) a rate of gaps or latencies related to the received live audio stream).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Walton to include calculating, by the second mobile computing device, a rate of gaps corresponding to the received live audio stream as taught by Einziger. One ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Walton in the Einziger system in order to capable of handling high listener traffic while delivering a high-quality audio experience to most or all listeners in real-time ([paragraph 0005] in Einziger).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method, wherein the first mobile computing device and the second mobile computing device are communicatively coupled via a wired connection (Walton: [paragraph 0042, 0074] describes the client computing device (e.g. the first mobile computing device) and the participant computing device (e.g. the second mobile computing device) are communicatively coupled via a wired connection).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method, wherein the first mobile computing device and the second mobile computing device are communicatively coupled via a wireless connection (Walton: [paragraph 0042, 0074] describes the client computing device (e.g. the first mobile computing device) and the participant computing device (e.g. the second mobile computing device) are communicatively coupled via a wireless connection).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Walton and Einziger teaches the computerized method, further comprising: receiving, by the first mobile computing device, the data representation of the live audio signal corresponding to the live event from an audio server computing device via the wireless network (Walton: [paragraph 0016-0017, 0027-0030, 0033, 0042] describes receiving by a client computing device (e.g. a first mobile computing device) a data of live audio signal related to a live chat (e.g. event) from an audio server computing device via the wireless network).
Regarding claim 11, this claim contains limitations found within that of claim 1 and the same rationale to rejection is used except for the claim 11 a system for real-time detection of millisecond gaps in live audio streams, the system comprising: a first mobile computing device communicatively coupled to a second mobile computing device, the first mobile computing device configured to. In the combination, Walton teaches a system for real-time detection of millisecond gaps in live audio streams, the system comprising: a first mobile computing device communicatively coupled to a second mobile computing device, the first mobile computing device configured to ([para
([paragraph 0020, 0030, 0042, 0047-0048] describes a system for real-time detects of millisecond gaps in live audio conversation (e.g. audio streams) and the client computing device (e.g. the first mobile computing device) communicatively coupled to the participant computing device (e.g. the second mobile computing device) the client computing device (e.g. the first mobile computing device) configured to receive a data).
Regarding claims 12-20, these claims contain limitations found within that of claims 2-10 and the same rationale to rejections are used.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
- Adams et al., US 2020/0186579 A1, Methods, systems, and apparatuses are provided for reservation management for client-initiated polling requests in a communication system.
- LI et al., US 2017/0034026 A1, a method for analyzing audio packets received during a time interval that corresponds with a conversation analysis segment to determine network jitter dynamics data and conversational interactivity data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEHULKUMAR J SHAH whose telephone number is (571)272-1072. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 6:05 am-3:55 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, TONIA DOLLINGER can be reached at 571-272-4170. 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.
/M.J.S/Examiner, Art Unit 2459 /SCHQUITA D GOODWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459