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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/16/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by ROEDEL et al. (US 2022/0021680 A1).
Re Claim 1, 5 & 9, ROEDEL teaches a system for setting multi online meeting, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0028]; A system for online meetings.)
the system comprising a client, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0028]; Users/clients.)
a server, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0040]; Servers.)
a first meeting control apparatus associated with a first room, and a second meeting control apparatus associated with a second room, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0031]; A first meeting location, a second meeting location, a first control related device, a second control related device.)
wherein, the client is configured to request to the server to add another meeting control apparatus to the online meeting which the first meeting control apparatus joins, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0028], [0040]; Adding users to an online meeting.)
the server is configured to provide access information to the second meeting control apparatus to the client in response to the request from the client, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0028], [0040]; Providing access information to a second user/device in response to a request from a first user/client.)
the client is configured to access to the second meeting control apparatus based on the access information provided by the server, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0032], [0040]; Configuring access for a second user/device to join the online meeting based on access information from a system related server.)
the client is configured to send the meeting ID to the second meeting control apparatus so that the second meeting control apparatus can join the online meeting, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0028]; A meeting identifier, various devices and user joining the meeting.)
the second meeting control apparatus is configured to perform a verification process to check if a person is in the second room or not, and (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0032]; The second user/device performs a verification process.)
the second meeting control apparatus is configured to join the online meeting and send an image captured by an image capture apparatus in the second room to the server after the verification process is passed. (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0032]; The second device/user is configured the join the meeting based on the capture and verified image.)
Re Claim 2, 6 & 10, ROEDEL discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the verification process includes:
the client is configured to show a verification screen on a display of the client to notify the person to make a predetermined gesture, (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0032]; Verification involving a gesture.)
the second meeting control apparatus is configured to obtain the image captured by the image capture apparatus and determine if the person makes the predetermined gesture based on the image, and (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0032]; Capturing and verifying the gesture.)
wherein the verification process is passed in a case where the second meeting control apparatus determines the person makes the predetermined gesture. (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0032]; Confirming the gesture.)
Re Claim 4 & 8, ROEDEL discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein, the server is configured to provide the client, after the second meeting control apparatus joins the online meeting, with an image captured by an image capture apparatus in the first room and the image captured by the image capture apparatus in the second room. (ROEDEL; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0016]-[0032]; User/clients/participants, an online meeting, capturing and transmitting images/photos from a user in first location/position to a user in a second location/position.)
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) 3, 7 & 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROEDEL et al. (US 2022/0021680 A1) as applied to claim 1-2 above, and further in view of Ittelson et al. (US 2022/0385857 A1).
Re Claim 3, 7 & 11, ROEDEL discloses the system according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the verification process includes: the second meeting control apparatus is configured to show a screen on a display located in the selected room, the screen showing a verification code, the client is configured to show a verification screen on a display of the client to notify the person to enter the verification code into the verification screen, and the client is configured to send an entered code to the second meeting control apparatus, and wherein the verification process is passed in a case where the entered code matches the verification code.
However, in analogous art, Ittelson teaches wherein the verification process includes:
the second meeting control apparatus is configured to show a screen on a display located in the selected room, the screen showing a verification code, the client is configured to show a verification screen on a display of the client to notify the person to enter the verification code into the verification screen, and (Ittelson; FIG. 1-9; Background, Summary, ¶ [0027]-[0031], [0034]-[0044]; The embodiment(s) detail passcode/password verification of a user in an online teleconference setting.)
the client is configured to send an entered code to the second meeting control apparatus, and (Ittelson; FIG. 1-9; Background, Summary, ¶ [0027]-[0031], [0034]-[0044]; The user enters the code.)
wherein the verification process is passed in a case where the entered code matches the verification code. (Ittelson; FIG. 1-9; Background, Summary, ¶ [0027]-[0031], [0034]-[0044]; The code is verified.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify ROEDEL in view of Ittelson to verify codes for online meetings for the reasons of verifying participants attending a videoconferences. (Ittelson Abstract & Summary)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00 EST.
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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443