DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because Figs. 4A-4M are of low quality and unclear, making it difficult to understand the invention. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by U.S Pub. No. 2009/0086953 A1 to Vendrow.
Regarding claim 1, Vendrow teaches a method for managing service calls (Fig.4) comprising:
receiving at least one incoming telephone call (Fig.4 and paragraph [0024]; call messaging system can be configured to receive an inbound call 404 between a caller device 402);
screening the at least one incoming call (Fig.4 and paragraph [0042]; At 406, the call messaging system can determine whether a caller has a matching caller ID. In some embodiments, the call messaging system can use other attributes associated with the call to specify whether to apply filtering rules in handling the call);
if the incoming call is from a valid caller then executing a valid call protocol; wherein the valid call protocol comprises connecting the valid caller to a service agent, prompting the valid caller for information pertaining to the service required (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0042]; the flow moves back to 412 to direct the caller to voicemail at 412. Back at 410, if call messaging system filters the call, then the flow passes to 412, otherwise the flow continues to 414 to determine whether to bypass screening, thereby overriding the use of custom rules at 416. In at least some embodiments, a call messaging system can be configured to enable a caller (or the call messaging system itself) to bypass a callee's customized rules for screening call based on a bypass condition),
receiving the information pertaining to the service required, processing information pertaining to the service required, determining a required action, and executing the required action (Fig. 2 and paragraph [0042]; If there is no bypass condition, flow 400 continues to 416 at which custom screening and customized screening rules can be applied. If the screening is bypassed at 414, or if the customized screening continues at 416, then the flow continues 420 to notify the called party e.g., the callee. Next, flow 400 continues to 422 at which a determination is made as to whether to screen the call e.g., determine whether in situ screening of an active call is available or activated, whereby "personal screening" is performed at the called device during the active call).
Regarding claim 2, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the step of screening comprises assigning a prioritization index to a valid caller (Fig.4, paragraphs [0038] and [0042]; identified inbound caller ID and any stored information associated with the caller, the Database 350 can assign a priority to the inbound call).
Regarding claim 3, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the step of screening comprises obtaining call identification markers (Fig.4, paragraphs [0038] and [0042]; the identified inbound caller ID and any stored information associated with the caller, the Database 350 can assign a priority to the inbound call).
Regarding claim 4, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 3 wherein the call identification markers comprise caller phone numbers (Fig. 4, paragraphs [0030] and [0042]; a large group of users where a user is identified by one or more telephone numbers).
Regarding claim 5, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 3 wherein the call identification markers comprise caller locations (paragraph [0029]; a caller to identify a specific extension or location at which to connect with the call).
Regarding claim 6, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 3 wherein the call identification markers comprise an advance mobile location (paragraphs [0029]- [0032]; a caller to identify a specific extension or location at which to connect with the call).
Regarding claim 7, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the step of screening comprises executing a non-valid call protocol if the incoming call is from a non-valid caller (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0042]; call messaging system can apply filtering rules that specify, for example, predetermined actions based on the caller ID, caller history, time of day, call frequency, or any other condition. If no, then the flow continues from 406 to 408, at which call messaging system determines whether to block the call (e.g., in response to a filtering rule). If yes, the call is disconnected at 412, otherwise flow 400 continues to 418, at which the call is screened using default screening rules).
Regarding claim 8, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 7 wherein the non-valid call protocol comprises rejecting the non-valid call (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0042]; call messaging system can apply filtering rules that specify, for example, predetermined actions based on the caller ID, caller history, time of day, call frequency, or any other condition. If no, then the flow continues from 406 to 408, at which call messaging system determines whether to block the call (e.g., in response to a filtering rule). If yes, the call is disconnected at 412, otherwise flow 400 continues to 418, at which the call is screened using default screening rules).
Regarding claim 9, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 7 wherein the non-valid call protocol comprises reporting the non-valid caller to authorities (paragraphs [0040]- [0042]; call messaging system 306 can provide a web interface, a softphone, default administrator configurations, and user-defined preferences to alert potential call receivers, enabling them to make decisions concerning which calls to answer, to redirect, and to ignore).
Regarding claim 10, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 7 wherein the non-valid call protocol comprises alerting law enforcement (paragraphs [0040]- [0042]; a call messaging system can detect a call generating from device 402 and enable a call originating at device 402 to bypass the custom screening so that emergency officials can quickly connect with a callee at caller device 432 without being impeded by the customized screening).
Regarding claim 11, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the step of executing the required action comprises providing service information to the caller (paragraphs [0040]- [0042]; a call messaging system can detect a call generating from device 402 and enable a call originating at device 402 to bypass the custom screening so that emergency officials can quickly connect with a callee at caller device 432 without being impeded by the customized screening).
Regarding claim 12, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the step of executing the required action comprises establishing a parallel remote connection to a caller device (paragraph [0039]; each call routing, the circuit switch or softswitch 340 can access any of the default endpoint, the saved ANI, and the saved actual first calling endpoint and can apply all user-defined routing rules simultaneously or sequentially to ring any or all of these stored endpoints. Also, if the receiver is busy, then for a high priority call, the switch 340 can facilitate a caller to barge in to connect the inbound call to a receiving endpoint 210, 220, and 290).
Regarding claim 13, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the set of executing the required action comprises dispatching an emergency response unit (paragraphs [0040]- [0042]; a call messaging system can detect a call generating from device 402 and enable a call originating at device 402 to bypass the custom screening so that emergency officials can quickly connect with a callee at caller device 432 without being impeded by the customized screening).
Regarding claim 14, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the set of executing the required action comprises determining if an emergency dispatch is required (paragraphs [0040]- [0042]; a call messaging system can detect a call generating from device 402 and enable a call originating at device 402 to bypass the custom screening so that emergency officials can quickly connect with a callee at caller device 432 without being impeded by the customized screening).
Regarding claim 15, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 wherein the step of executing the required action comprises connecting the caller to a human service agent (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0042]; call messaging system can be configured to receive an inbound call 404 between a caller device 402 and a callee device 432. At 406, the call messaging system can determine whether a caller has a matching caller ID. In some embodiments, the call messaging system can use other attributes associated with the call to specify whether to apply filtering rules in handling the call).
Regarding claim 16, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising establishing a preferred language for communicating and asking prompting questions in the preferred language for communicating with the caller (paragraph [0025]; the first menu item can be a prompt asking for the user name or the reason for this call or other information. The caller answers with some reason, and this reason is played to the callee. By listening to the reason and viewing the caller-ID, the callee can decide how to dispatch this call. For example, the following are applicable actions: answer this call, send this call to voice mail, send this call to another agent, and let callee or system default policies route this call. Note that speech recognition can evaluate and parse the caller reason for key words. Speech recognition of keywords can dispatch this call to user or system defined routing rules or to available agents).
Regarding claim 17, Vendrow teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising categorizing the incoming call according to the information prompted from the caller by assigning a category selected from: emergency call, non-emergency call, harassment call, nuisance call, service request call, information call, extension call, routing call, common call, repeat call and combinations thereof (paragraphs [0040]- [0042]; a call messaging system can detect a call generating from device 402 and enable a call originating at device 402 to bypass the custom screening so that emergency officials can quickly connect with a callee at caller device 432 without being impeded by the customized screening).
Regarding claim 19, Rohde teaches a system for providing automatic service-call management, the system comprising:
an inbound call screener configured and operable to receive inbound call identifiers (Fig.4 and paragraph [0024]; call messaging system can be configured to receive an inbound call 404 between a caller device 402), to
identify nuisance calls, and to block identified nuisance calls (Fig.4 and paragraph [0042]; at 406, the call messaging system can determine whether a caller has a matching caller ID. In some embodiments, the call messaging system can use other attributes associated with the call to specify whether to apply filtering rules in handling the call);
an automatic call distributer configured and operable to prioritize inbound calls (paragraphs [0030] and [0038]- [0039]; softphone 144 can be configured to notify one or more callee's for all, or a defined subset, of incoming calls. For example, a softphone 144 may be used to notify a callee about incoming priority calls where priority is determined by time of day, detected presence, temporary duration policies, and other policies. Depending upon the enabled policy, softphone 144 can display caller-ID, destination number, contact name and information, call routing options, and other significant caller information);
a call router configured to connect a caller to at least one automatic customer service agent (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0042]; the flow moves back to 412 to direct the caller to voicemail at 412. Back at 410, if call messaging system filters the call, then the flow passes to 412, otherwise the flow continues to 414 to determine whether to bypass screening, thereby overriding the use of custom rules at 416. In at least some embodiments, a call messaging system can be configured to enable a caller (or the call messaging system itself) to bypass a callee's customized rules for screening call based on a bypass condition);
at least one automatic customer service agent configured to prompt the caller for key information and to store the key information in a memory (paragraphs [0025] and [0026]; speech recognition can evaluate and parse the caller reason for key words. Speech recognition of keywords can dispatch this call to user or system defined routing rules or to available agents. According to at least some embodiments, the term "screening rule" can refer to a rule or a subset of processes for governing the screening of an active call at callee devices 108 or 109); and
a call processor configured to determine a required course of action for the incoming call (Fig. 2 and paragraph [0042]; If there is no bypass condition, flow 400 continues to 416 at which custom screening and customized screening rules can be applied. If the screening is bypassed at 414, or if the customized screening continues at 416, then the flow continues 420 to notify the called party e.g., the callee. Next, flow 400 continues to 422 at which a determination is made as to whether to screen the call e.g., determine whether in situ screening of an active call is available or activated, whereby "personal screening" is performed at the called device during the active call).
Regarding claim 20, Vendrow teaches the system of claim 1 wherein the required course of action is selected from dispatching emergency units, connecting a human service agent, reassuring a caller and combinations thereof, and communicating with emergency dispatch units (paragraphs [0040]- [0042]; a call messaging system can detect a call generating from device 402 and enable a call originating at device 402 to bypass the custom screening so that emergency officials can quickly connect with a callee at caller device 432 without being impeded by the customized screening).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Pub. No. 2021/0352460 A1 to Rohde et al. (hereinafter” Rohde”) in view of U.S Patent No. 9,420,116 B1 to Hamilton et al. (hereinafter “Hamilton”).
Regarding claim 18, Rohde teaches a method for providing automatic emergency call management (Fig1 and paragraph [0112]; AI system 14 will be integrated into the PSAPs' call taking) the method comprising:
receiving an incoming call from a caller (Fig1 and paragraph [0112]; AI system uses a language identifier and voice recognition to “listen in” on emergency calls from a caller 10 via a communication link 11 received in a PSAP or first responder dispatch center 12);
obtaining incoming call identification markers (paragraphs [0110] and [0112]; caller 10, may be routed to a particular PSAP 12 by a routing facility based on the location of the caller);
connecting automatic service agent to caller; automatic agent prompting caller for information (paragraphs [0087] and [0113]; at the center of the framework is the AI Engine (termed Carla), which provides a cloud-based emergency response call assist question and answer BOT (202));
categorizing call according to the information prompted from the caller; establishing that a dispatch is required (paragraphs [0073] and [0112]- [0113]; enables call takers to more quickly diagnose health emergencies and thereby provide correct immediate response actions while dispatching EMS, police, or fire resources—which could mean the difference of several critical minutes on the initiation of patient stabilization while EMTs arrive at the scene).
However, Vendrow does not explicitly teach applying a call filter; assigning a prioritization value to the incoming call; routing call according to prioritization value; checking if an emergency response unit has already been dispatched; and if no emergency response unit has already been dispatched then dispatching unit to emergency.
In the same field of endeavor, Hamilton discloses applying a call filter;
assigning a prioritization value to the incoming call; routing call according to prioritization value (Fig.2 steps 204-210 and column 8, lines 12-38; esponsive to a first call and a second call being placed to emergency call center 15, the first call and second call may be presented to an emergency operator in accordance with a relative priority determined by priority module 38) ; checking if an emergency response unit has already been dispatched; and if no emergency response unit has already been dispatched then dispatching unit to emergency (column 3, lines 33-51; a call may be treated and/or handled with a lower priority if the associated geographical location is the scene of a previously reported car accident and police is already present or on the way). Such a call is likely to be a duplicate reporting of an emergency that is already being handled. Depending on the characteristics of the emergency, duplicate reporting of an emergency may be a reason to lower the priority of a particular emergency call).
Hamilton
At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to modify Vendrow’s teaching with a feature of applying a call filter; assigning a prioritization value to the incoming call; routing call according to prioritization value; checking if an emergency response unit has already been dispatched; and if no emergency response unit has already been dispatched then dispatching unit to emergency as taught by Hamilton in order to present an incoming calls to an emergency operator in accordance with the determined priority (column 5-7;Hamilton).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKELAW A TESHALE whose telephone number is (571)270-5302. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am -6pm.
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, FAN TSANG can be reached at (571) 272-7547. 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.
AKELAW TESHALE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2694
/AKELAW TESHALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694