DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to communications filed 18 December 2025.
Claims 14-17 have been added.
Claims 1-17 are subject to examination.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Republic of Korea on 18 August 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR10-2023-0108514 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 18 December 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
The objections to the claims have been withdrawn in view of amendments.
Applicant’s arguments 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.
Examiner’s Note on Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Upon examination, the application was reviewed for a potential rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101. The independent claim recites:
“… receive from a user terminal a user’s selection for a chat room in which work participants are participating,
receive a conversation recording file that records a conversation among the work participants related to meeting contents, wherein the conversation recording file is received from an independent conversation channel outside the chat room,
generate meeting records obtained by converting the meeting contents into the text form by applying an artificial intelligence model to the conversation recording file according to the user’s request for generating meeting records, and
share the meeting records through a chat room related to the user’s selection.”
The Examiner found that the claimed invention, as a whole, integrates a judicial exception, if present, into a practical application. For instance, the claimed invention denotes use of an artificial intelligence (AI) model to generate meeting records, wherein upon examination of the specification denotes:
[p. 20, l. 11-p.21, l. 3] “… artificial intelligence model may correspond to a model built to receive a conversation recording file as input and generate output in the text format … may be implemented in a structure in which the speech recognition model and the text summary model are connected to each other … may be built as a first model that receives a conversation recording file as input and generates a script as output … may be built as a second model that receives a conversation recording file as input and generates a summary as output …”
[p. 35, l. 4-13] “… artificial intelligence model 630 may be designed to receive a conversation recording file as input and output a text-type script and summary related to the meeting contents …”
See also:
[p. 2, l. 10-12] “… since generating meeting records and tasks require additional human resources and time, a technology for improving efficiency in the process of generating meeting records and tasks is needed.”
Such that, the AI model is specific in use to take inputs of a meeting to generate outputs such as text conversion and summarization of the meeting to be used and shared to other meeting participants which is to improve on the efficiency of generating meeting records and other outputs related to the meeting without requiring additional human resources and time.
Since the claim as a whole integrates the judicial exception into a practical application, the claim is eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-13 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer et al. (US-20240176960-A1) hereinafter Maurer in view of Adlersberg et al. (US-10963505-B2) hereinafter Adlersberg.
Regarding claim 1, Maurer discloses:
An apparatus for providing meeting records in an artificial intelligence-based chat room ([0136-0137] server(s) 102 (not shown) may be configured to implement the ML model(s) (i.e. AI-based) 143 that ingests input data 405 (e.g., to output a summary document for certain examples (i.e. providing meeting records by using ML models to output summaries and other information; AI-based chat room by providing summaries and other information by ML models))), the apparatus comprising:
a memory ([0025] memory); and
a processor electrically connected to the memory ([0024] processor(s) … fetch … instructions stored in the computer-readable media (i.e. connected to for fetching instructions)),
wherein the processor ([0024] processor(s)) is configured to:
receive from a user terminal a user’s selection for a chat room in which work participants are participating ([0067] user selects a channel, see [0069] workspace … one or more user identifiers can be mapped to, or otherwise associated with, the group identifier (i.e. work participants, e.g. such as for employee of or otherwise affiliated with Acme are participating)),
receive a conversation recording file that records a conversation among the work participants related to meeting contents ([0037] accepts inputs … inputs to the ML model(s) 142 may include the ambient data associated with the synchronous multimedia collaboration session including the real-time communications that takes place within the virtual space between other users … have access to various other data generating the one or more summary documents, such as … (e.g., virtual space data, channel data, message data, thread data, emoji data, reactji data, and the like (i.e. recording files to record the data such as virtual space data, channel data, message data, thread data, emoji data, reactji data, and the like))),
generate meeting records obtained by converting the meeting contents into text form by applying an artificial intelligence model to the conversation recording file according to the user’s request for generating meeting records ([0158] ML model(s) (i.e. AI model) may generate and output information … convert speech to text … generate … a summary of the teleconferencing meeting from the filtered data … determine action items/relevant details … etc. (i.e. on inputs as above), see [0153] causing display of the teleconferencing meeting summary may be initiated by a user request), and
share the meeting records through a chat room related to the user’s selection ([0117] machine learning model can be used to determine a summary of contents of a channel and can create a collaborative document comprising the summary for posting in the channel (i.e. sharing), see also [0110] collaborative document (also referred to as a document or canvas) … shared canvases).
Maurer does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the conversation recording file is received from an independent conversation channel outside the chat room,
However, Adlersberg discloses:
wherein the conversation recording file is received from an independent conversation channel outside the chat room ([4:28-42] capture and/or record and/or acquire audio and/or video and/or audio-video of a meeting … stored in a Meeting Data Repository … may be received from an external source, such as, from a teleconferencing service that is operated by a third party … store it … in the Meeting Data Repository (i.e. independent channel outside of the chat room by being an external source such as a separate teleconference in a separate teleconferencing service)),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Maurer in view of Adlersberg to have the conversation recording file received from an independent conversation channel outside of the chat room. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to receive data from an external source and to notify or to alert them that there are non-overlapping portions of the meeting that exist only in a particular source and not in other source(s) of audio and/or video (Adlersberg, [4:28-5:7]).
Regarding claim 17, it does not further define nor teach over the limitations of claim 1, therefore, claim 17 is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 1, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor generates to-do recommendations related to the meeting contents through the artificial intelligence model when a to-do recommendation request related to the meeting records is received from the user terminal ([0144] output one or more summary documents summarizing the contents of a meeting and/or can provide any tasks, deadlines, and/or action items from the meeting, see [0153] causing display of the teleconferencing meeting summary may be initiated by a user request (i.e. requesting for summary includes a to-do recommendation request as the summary provides tasks, deadlines and/or action items)).
Regarding claim 3, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 2, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor generates a to-do recommendation list that includes the to-do recommendations and selection options for each to-do recommendation ([0143] ML model(s) 142 may be trained to generate one or more summary interface elements associated with the summary objects to receive the user interaction and thereby initiate completion of the tasks, see also [0152] one or more summary objects may comprise a task list associated with the dates of June 13 and 14 … comprise checkboxes that are configured to receive user interaction to indicate completion of certain tasks (i.e. selection options for each to-do recommendation)) and
adds the to-do recommendation list to the meeting records or provides the to-do recommendation list through the chat room ([0117] machine learning model can be used to determine a summary of contents of a channel and can create a collaborative document comprising the summary for posting in the channel (i.e. sharing), see also [0110] collaborative document (also referred to as a document or canvas) … shared canvases (i.e. the tasks as above in the summary as above)).
Regarding claim 4, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 3, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein, if a specific work participant’s selection is entered through the selection option for each to-do recommendation within the chat room, the processor generates a task related to a corresponding to-do recommendation ([0143] ML model(s) 142 may be trained to generate one or more summary interface elements associated with the summary objects to receive the user interaction and thereby initiate completion of the tasks (i.e. generating the task related to the to-do recommendation, e.g. to complete them), see also [0144] output one or more summary documents summarizing the contents of a meeting and/or can provide any tasks, deadlines, and/or action items from the meeting).
Regarding claim 5, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 4, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein, if a plurality of selection options are selected by the specific work participant ([0152] one or more summary objects may comprise a task list associated with the dates of June 13 and 14 … comprise checkboxes that are configured to receive user interaction to indicate completion of certain tasks (i.e. selecting both boxes), see also [0143] ML model(s) 142 may be trained to generate one or more summary interface elements associated with the summary objects to receive the user interaction and thereby initiate completion of the tasks), the processor sequentially generates tasks for individual to-do recommendations ([0143] ML model(s) 142 … define a series of executable steps … execution of the series (i.e. sequentially) of steps may be initiated by the user interaction … may be trained to generate one or more summary interface elements associated with the summary objects to receive the user interaction and thereby initiate completion of the tasks (i.e. generating the tasks related to the to-do recommendation, e.g. to complete them)).
Regarding claim 7, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 1, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor inserts the meeting records into the chat room ([0117] machine learning model can be used to determine a summary of contents of a channel and can create a collaborative document comprising the summary for posting in the channel (i.e. sharing), see also [0110] collaborative document (also referred to as a document or canvas) … shared canvases) or a meeting map for managing meeting records depending on a location of the meeting records generation request ([0067] user selects a channel, see [0069] workspace … one or more user identifiers can be mapped to, or otherwise associated with, the group identifier (i.e. work participants, e.g. such as for employee of or otherwise affiliated with Acme) [0153] causing display of the teleconferencing meeting summary may be initiated by a user request (i.e. within the selected channel)).
Regarding claim 8, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 7, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor provides a list related to the meeting records in response to a request from any one of the work participants on the chat room ([0143] ML model(s) 142 may be trained to generate one or more summary interface elements associated with the summary objects to receive the user interaction and thereby initiate completion of the tasks, see also [0152] one or more summary objects may comprise a task list associated with the dates of June 13 and 14 … comprise checkboxes that are configured to receive user interaction to indicate completion of certain tasks (i.e. selection options for each to-do recommendation), see [0117] machine learning model can be used to determine a summary of contents of a channel and can create a collaborative document comprising the summary for posting in the channel (i.e. sharing the requested summary to be displayed is a request to share/post the summary), see also [0110] collaborative document (also referred to as a document or canvas) … shared canvases) or meeting map.
Regarding claim 9, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 1, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor receives a conversation among the work participants through streaming from the respective user terminals in real-time and generates the conversation recording file ([0037] accepts inputs … inputs to the ML model(s) 142 may include the ambient data associated with the synchronous multimedia collaboration session including the real-time communications that takes place within the virtual space between other users … have access to various other data generating the one or more summary documents, such as … (e.g., virtual space data, channel data, message data, thread data, emoji data, reactji data, and the like (i.e. recording files to record the data such as virtual space data, channel data, message data, thread data, emoji data, reactji data, and the like))).
Regarding claim 10, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 1, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor inputs the conversation recording file into the artificial intelligence model to generate a script obtained by converting speeches of the work participants into text and a summary of the script and then generates the meeting records based on at least one of the script and the summary ([0158] ML model(s) may generate and output information … convert speech to text … generate … a summary of the teleconferencing meeting from the filtered data … determine action items/relevant details … etc. (i.e. on inputs as above), see [0153] causing display of the teleconferencing meeting summary may be initiated by a user request).
Regarding claim 11, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 10, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor displays the script or the summary as a conversation message of a chat room related to the user’s selection ([0117] machine learning model can be used to determine a summary of contents of a channel and can create a collaborative document comprising the summary for posting in the channel (i.e. sharing the requested summary to be displayed is a request to share/post the summary), see also [0110] collaborative document (also referred to as a document or canvas) … shared canvases (i.e. the tasks as above in the summary as above)).
Regarding claim 12, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 11, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein, when a selection for the conversation message is received from any one of the work participants ([0087] selecting the thread reply preview 226), the processor displays an interface related to the conversation message ([0087] thread replies may appear in a thread pane 230 that may be separate from the channel pane 218 and may be viewed by other members of the channel by selecting the thread reply preview 226 in the channel pane 218, see [FIG. 2A], see [0117] machine learning model can be used to determine a summary of contents of a channel and can create a collaborative document comprising the summary for posting in the channel (i.e. sharing the requested summary to be displayed is a request to share/post the summary), see also [0110] collaborative document (also referred to as a document or canvas) … shared canvases).
Regarding claim 13, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 12, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor provides through the interface at least one of a plurality of functions including viewing a script related to the conversation message ([0087] thread replies may appear in a thread pane 230 that may be separate from the channel pane 218 and may be viewed by other members of the channel by selecting the thread reply preview 226 in the channel pane 218, see [FIG. 2A]), viewing a summary ([0144] output one or more summary documents summarizing the contents of a meeting and/or can provide any tasks, deadlines, and/or action items from the meeting, see [0153] causing display of the teleconferencing meeting summary may be initiated by a user request (i.e. requesting for summary includes a to-do recommendation request as the summary, i.e. viewing summary, provides tasks, deadlines and/or action items)), listening to a conversation recording ([0033] The audio/video component 118 can be configured to store audio and/or video data associated with the conversation, such as to enable users with appropriate permissions to listen and/or view the audio and/or video data), and generating to-dos ([0144] output one or more summary documents summarizing the contents of a meeting and/or can provide any tasks, deadlines, and/or action items from the meeting, see [0153] causing display of the teleconferencing meeting summary may be initiated by a user request (i.e. requesting for summary includes a to-do recommendation request as the summary provides tasks, deadlines and/or action items)).
Regarding claim 16, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 1, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein the processor shares the meeting records by using at least one of a plurality of methods including message display ([0161] … messages typed in the thread), file attachment ([0143] such objects can include, but are not limited to, files), and link sharing within the chat room ([0141] data may include … links to files, calendar objects, relevance data and the like).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer et al. (US-20240176960-A1) hereinafter Maurer in view of Adlersberg et al. (US-10963505-B2) hereinafter Adlersberg further in view of Rajendran et al. (US-12326928-B2) hereinafter Rajendran.
Regarding claim 6, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 4, set forth above,
Maurer discloses:
wherein, if the specific work participant has access rights to the meeting records ([0067] depending on the permissions associated with a channel, users who are not members of the channel may have limited ability to interact with … a channel (i.e. access rights)),
Maurer does not explicitly disclose:
the processor activates selection options for the to-do recommendation but otherwise requests approval from a work participant having the access rights to activate the selection options for the to-do recommendation.
However, Rajendran discloses:
the processor activates selection options for the to-do recommendation but otherwise requests approval from a work participant having the access rights to activate the selection options for the to-do recommendation ([22:33-51] check that the requesting user is permitted to delete the snapshot … allow the requesting user to select a snapshot from the list that is to be deleted, and (4) wait for a deny or allow indication before taking actions that cause deletion of the snapshot … MPA workflow checks with multiple parties for approval to delete the snapshot. In one embodiment, an email or other notification is sent to however many approvers have been defined and codified into the MPA designation in a manner that facilitates machine-to-machine contact with the approvers (i.e. requestor can select but to activate the action would require approval from approvers)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Maurer in view of Rajendran to have the processor activate selection options for the to-do recommendation but otherwise requests approval from a work participant having access rights to activate the selection options for the to-do recommendation. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to wait for a deny or allow indication before taking actions such as to check with multiple parties for approval (Rajendran, [22:33-51]).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer et al. (US-20240176960-A1) hereinafter Maurer in view of Adlersberg et al. (US-10963505-B2) hereinafter Adlersberg further in view of Kasap et al. (US-20240420404-A1) hereinafter Kasap.
Regarding claim 14, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 10, set forth above,
Maurer-Adlersberg do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor identifies conversational tone of each work participant in a process of recognizing the speeches of the work participants and converts the script or the summary to a conversation message to which the conversational tone is applied in the process of displaying the script or the summary as the conversation message.
However, Kasap discloses:
wherein the processor identifies conversational tone of each work participant in a process of recognizing the speeches of the work participants ([0056] text summary indicates the mood … of the audio input (i.e. tone of audio of the participants)) and converts the script or the summary to a conversation message to which the conversational tone is applied in the process of displaying the script or the summary as the conversation message ([0057] generative language models to … match the tone of the message (i.e. applying the tone for presentation)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Maurer-Adlersberg in view of Kasap to have the processor identify conversational tone of each work participant in a process of recognizing the speeches and converting the script or summary to which the conversational tone is applied. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to use the generative language models to remove pause or filler words, eliminate redundant information, and shorten, condense, or decrease lengthy explanations to increase clarity, improve grammar, and better match the tone of the message (Kasap, [0056-0057]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer et al. (US-20240176960-A1) hereinafter Maurer in view of Adlersberg et al. (US-10963505-B2) hereinafter Adlersberg further in view of Lee et al. (US-20250039336-A1) hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 15, Maurer-Adlersberg disclose:
The apparatus of claim 10, set forth above,
Maurer-Adlersberg do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the processor selectively provides a translation function in a process of providing the meeting records, the script, or the summary.
However, Lee discloses:
wherein the processor selectively provides a translation function in a process of providing the meeting records ([0027] generating summaries and translations from meeting audio (i.e. selective as another language to English is a translation but English to English would not need translation)), the script, or the summary.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Maurer-Adlersberg in view of Lee to have selectively provided a translation function in a process of providing the meeting records. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to generate translations from meeting audio, etc. (Lee, [0027]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
SanGiovanni et al. (US-20170316611-A1) SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR VERY LARGE-SCALE COMMUNICATION AND ASYNCHRONOUS DOCUMENTATION IN VIRTUAL REALITY AND AUGMENTED REALITY ENVIRONMENTS ENABLING GUIDED TOURS OF SHARED DESIGN ALTERNATIVES;
Nowak-Przygodzki et al. (US-10645035-B2) AUTOMATED ASSISTANTS WITH CONFERENCE CAPABILITIES;
Kim (US-10986046-B2) APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR GENERATING SUMMARY OF CONVERSATION STORING;
Daredia et al. (US-11689379-B2) GENERATING CUSTOMIZED MEETING INSIGHTS BASED ON USER INTERACTIONS AND MEETING MEDIA;
Xiao-Devins (US-20230136309-A1) VIRTUAL ASSISTANT FOR TASK IDENTIFICATION;
Wells et al. (US-20230163988-A1) COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING AN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POWERED DIGITAL MEETING ASSISTANT;
Tanaka et al. (US-12170580-B2) MEETING ASSIST PROCESS FOR EFFICIENT MEETING MANAGEMENT;
Fu et al. (US-20240395254-A1) SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LIVE SUMMARIZATION.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alex Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-8173. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM ET.
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, Kamal Divecha can be reached at (571)272-5863. 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.
/Alex Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453