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 .
1. This action in response to the application filed on July 6, 2024. Claims 24-25 are cancelled. Claims 1-23 are pending. Claims 1-23 represent Multimedia Conferencing Platform, And System And Method For Presenting Media Artifacts.
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.
2. Claims 15-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim U.S. 20210224491 in view Acker et al. U.S. 20060256109 further in view of Lauder U.S. 20070028173.
Kim teaches the invention substantially including Device and Method for Providing Application translation Information (see abstract).
As to claim 15, Kim teaches a method for autonomously guided presentation of media artifacts, comprising:
receiving, by a processor, an input from one or more users (paragraph 20, Kim discloses receiving a user input).
Kim teaches substantial features of the claimed invention including generating, by the processor, a resource of file application in response to the input (paragraph 20, Kim discloses obtaining a resource of file application through an operating system of the device in response to the user input), but fails to explicitly teach media artifacts.
However, Acker teaches Interactive Floorplan Viewer. Acker teaches media artifacts (abstract, Acker discloses displaying a media artifact).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Kim by replacing “resource of file application” of Kim with the teaching “media artifacts” of Acker with the motivation being to provide a facility for display multimedia artifacts (see abstract).
Kim and Acker teaches substantial features of the claimed invention including displaying media artifacts (abstract of Acker), but fail to explicitly teach tile.
However, Lauder teaches Method and System for Application Broadcast. Lauder teaches tile (paragraph 18, Lauder discloses tiles, and each tile represents a specific segment of the display screen and corresponds to a specific portion of the display screen pixels).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Kim and Acker to include the teaching of “discloses tiles, and each tile represents a specific segment of the display screen” of Lauder with the motivation being to allow presentation at the participant's DPS of the most current version of the moderator's display screen (see abstract).
As to claim 16, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 15, wherein for generating the one or more media artifacts, the method comprises any one or combination of: retrieving, by the processor, the one or more media artifacts from a database or an external entity; processing, by the processor, the one or more retrieved media artifacts to generate further media artifacts using an AI engine; or generating, by the processor, the one or more media artifacts based on the input (abstract of Kim).
As to claim 17, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 15, wherein a first subset of media artifacts from the one or more media artifacts are displayed sequentially, and a second subset of media artifacts from the one or more media artifacts are displayed concurrently (paragraph 13 of Acker).
As to claim 18, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 15, wherein for displaying the one or more media artifacts, the method comprises, determining, by the processor, an order of displaying the one or more media artifacts on the one or more tiles (paragraph 13 of Acker).
As to claim 19, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 15, further comprising determining, by the processor, at least one of: size, number, orientation, or arrangement of the one or more tiles for displaying the one or more media artifacts (paragraph 14 of Acker).
As to claim 20, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 19, further comprising instantiating, by the processor, the one or more tiles based on the determination of at least one of: size, number, orientation, or arrangement of the one or more tiles (abstract of Lauder).
As to claim 21, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 15, comprising iteratively receiving the one or more inputs, generating the one or more media artifacts based on the inputs, and displaying the one or more media artifacts on the one or more tiles, in real-time (paragraph 12 of Acker).
As to claim 22, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 15, wherein the one or more tiles are accessible on scanning at least one of: a uniform resource locator (URL) or an automatic identification and data capture (AIDC) means (abstract of Lauder).
As to claim 23, Kim, Acker and Louder teach the method of claim 15, further comprising: identifying, by the processor, one or more potential symptoms based on the one or more inputs using an artificial intelligence (AI) engine; matching, by the processor, the one or more potential symptoms with one or more potential diagnoses using the AI engine; and displaying, by the processor, the one or more media artifacts generated based on the one or more potential diagnoses (abstract of Kim).
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 1-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art of record (in particular, Kim U.S. 20210224491 does not disclose, with respect to claim 1, “a method for displaying one or more media artifacts, comprising: receiving, by a processor, one or more inputs from one or more users through one or more tiles configured to display a corresponding media artifact, wherein the one or more tiles are configured to communicate with at least one of: other tiles, or an external entity; receiving, by the processor, one or more retrieved data from either the other tiles or the external entity, wherein the other tiles or the external entity are configured to retrieve and transmit the one or more retrieved data in response to the one or more inputs; and updating, by the processor, the media artifact displayed on the one or more tiles based on at least one of: the one or more inputs and/or the one or more retrieved data,” as claimed. Rather, Kim discloses receiving a user input and a text to be displayed (abstract). Although Kim teaching covers some of the claimed invention, it fails to teach the claimed invention as a whole. Furthermore, Acker et al. U.S. 20060256109 further in view of Lauder U.S. 20070028173 teach substantial some features of the claimed invention such as displaying a media artifact (abstract) and tiles, and each tile represents a specific segment of the display screen and corresponds to a specific portion of the display screen pixels (paragraph 18), respectively. Kim in combination with prior art Acker and Lauder did not teach the claimed invention ether. Accordingly, claims 1-14 are allowed.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EL HADJI SALL whose telephone number is (571)272-4010. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-8:30 (flexible).
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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 5712724001. 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.
/EL HADJI M SALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457