DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is responsive to the communications filed on 06/24/2026.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
3. Claims 1-10 have been amended.
4. Claims 11-20 have been added.
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 .
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 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.
Claim Objections
6. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “a non-transitory storage medium…for implementing remote conference as defined in claim 1” which includes all the limitations of claim 1. However, applicant has amended claim 10 to include the same limitations that have been amended into claim 1. This is redundant as claim 10 includes all of claim 1. The examiner suggests amending claim 10 to remove the “wherein” clause. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
7. Claims 1, 2, 5-7, 9-20, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenberg (US 2017/0070702) in view of Tseng et al. (US 2013/0194376), Saleh et al. (US 2011/0050842), and Kenoyer et al. (US 2016/0028995).
Regarding claim 1, Rosenberg disclosed:
A method for implementing remote conference (Paragraph 9, video conference meeting), characterized in that the method comprises:
when the remote conference is in live streamer only (Paragraph 24, presenter not currently sharing content), collecting an image video signal (Figure 1, camera 130) of the live streamer and an audio signal (Figure 1, microphone 150) of the live streamer and sending them to a remote output device (Figure 1, video conference server 200) for output after processing (Paragraph 21, aggregating audio/video data) (Paragraph 19, I/O module 220 (of video conference server) sends and receives audio/video data between participants of the meeting; received video is displayed, camera provides video data to be sent to other participants; speakers play received audio data; and microphone provides audio input to be sent to other participants. Paragraph 21, video conference server aggregates video and audio from participants and provides the video and audio data to video conference clients. Paragraph 24, while sharing of desktop content is a popular feature of video conference meetings, it is not always relevant. The presenter may not be currently sharing any desktop content (i.e., live streamer only). Figure 1 showing presenter 100A sharing their video feed with participant 100B); and
when the remote conference is in live streamer plus shared content (Paragraph 24, content shared from presenter’s desktop);
collecting and processing the image video signal of the live streamer (Paragraph 23, presenter’s image has been received), a video information of a live stream content (Paragraph 24, content shared has been received) and the audio signal (Paragraph 25, audio data) of the live streamer (Paragraphs 23-25, verifying that the presenter’s image, content shared from the presenter’s desktop, and audio data produced by the presenter has been properly received);
transmitting the video information of the live stream content to a local display device for display (Paragraph 21, Figure 1, participant 100D showing content being shared on their display); and
sending the processed image video signal of the live streamer, the processed video information of the live stream content and the processed audio signal of the live streamer to a remote output device for output (Paragraph 21, Figure 1, video conference server takes the video and audio data and aggregates it into a single data stream and transmits to video conference clients).
While Rosenberg disclosed instances where the participants are sharing content or not (see above), Rosenberg did not explicitly disclose specific modes. Specifically, Rosenberg did not explicitly disclose the mode of live streamer only and the mode of live streamer plus shared content.
However, in an analogous art, Tseng disclosed the mode of live streamer only and the mode of live streamer plus shared content (Paragraph 20, in a video conference, the sharing terminal transmits video frames captured by the video camera and audio signals captured by the microphone to a plurality of remote terminals through the network. The remote terminals receive images of user/users in front of the video camera (i.e., live streamer only). This is considered the video status of the video conference. When the sharing terminal changes from sharing the video frames with the remote terminals to sharing sharable content, the sharing terminal triggers a switch event which is now changed from video status to sharing status (i.e., live streamer plus shared content) of the video conference).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg with Tseng because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modes of Tseng with the teachings of Rosenberg in order to improve the efficiency of the video conference (Tseng, Paragraph 7).
While Rosenberg and Tseng disclose local and remote displays (see above), Rosenberg and Tseng did not explicitly disclose wherein the local display device and the remote output device present different content, and wherein the local display device displays only the video information of the live stream content without displaying the image video of the live streamer, and the remote output device outputs both the image video of the live streamer and a shared content screen.
However, in an analogous art, Saleh disclosed wherein the local display device and the remote output device present different content (Figure 3, Paragraph 24, showing a local display device 308 and a remote display device 358. Local display device displays remote participants and the remote display device displays the local participants (i.e., different content)), and
wherein the local display device (i.e., screen 608 displaying remote participants) displays only the video information of the live stream content without displaying the image video of the live streamer (Figure 6, Paragraph 39, local classroom includes a set of display screens 608 that display remote participants or a presentation screen that shows educational material), and
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg and Tseng with Saleh because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the differences in local and remote displays of Saleh with the teachings of Rosenberg and Tseng in order to further enhance the distance learning experience (Saleh, Paragraph 35).
While Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh disclose a local and remote display device displaying different content (see above), Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh did not explicitly disclose the remote output device outputs both the image video of the live streamer and a shared content screen.
However, in an analogous art, Kenoyer disclosed the remote output device outputs both the image video of the live streamer and a shared content screen
(Paragraph 22, computer screen showing a PowerPoint presentation. Paragraph 23, allowing a presenter to stream a compressed and scaled image from a computer screen to a videoconferencing system. The videoconferencing system displays the scaled image as a live graphic on a remote monitor (i.e., remote output device). The remote monitor shows a live view of the presenter (i.e., image video of the live streamer) and the computer screen at the same time).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh with Kenoyer because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the remote output device outputting both image video of the live streamer and shared content of Kenoyer with the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh in order to dynamically share bandwidth (Kenoyer, Paragraph 23).
Regarding claim 10, the claim is substantially similar to claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 2, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the method further comprises: when the remote conference is in the mode of live streamer plus shared content, the collecting and processing the image video signal of the live streamer comprises: when the image video signal of the live streamer contains a close-up image of the live streamer, obtaining the close-up image video signal of the live streamer as the processed image video signal of the live streamer (Rosenberg, Figure 1, 100B showing a close up image of the presenter); and
when the image video signal of the live streamer contains an image but no close-up image of the live streamer, taking the image video signal of the live streamer as the processed image video signal of the live streamer (Rosenberg, Figure 1, 100D showing an image but not of the presenter).
Regarding claim 5, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
the method further comprises: when a switching condition is satisfied, switching the remote conference mode to a mode corresponding to the switching condition (Tseng, Paragraph 20, in a video conference, the sharing terminal transmits video frames captured by the video camera and audio signals captured by the microphone to a plurality of remote terminals through the network. The remote terminals receive images of user/users in front of the video camera (i.e., live streamer only). This is considered the video status of the video conference. When the sharing terminal changes from sharing the video frames with the remote terminals to sharing sharable content, the sharing terminal triggers a switch event which is now changed from video status to sharing status (i.e., live streamer plus shared content) of the video conference).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, the limitations of claim 5 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
the remote conference mode further comprises an interaction mode, and when a condition for the interaction mode is satisfied, a remote participant can interact with the live streamer (Rosenberg, Paragraph 37, even after confirming that the video stream has been received, the video content may be out of sync (i.e., mode satisfied, out of sync or in sync) and the presenter can ask other participants to confirm that they are seeing the correct slide in the presentation (i.e., interaction mode)).
Regarding claim 7, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
the method further comprises: when receiving a request for creating a live stream sent by a participant, responding to the request (Rosenberg, Paragraph 22, presenter requesting to verify receipt and accurate presentation of audio/video data. Paragraph 24, verifying that the content has been received); and
when a condition for ending a remote conference is satisfied, ending a current remote conference (Tseng, Paragraph 31, if there is no sharable content having an index number smaller than the index number of the current shared content, the video conference will end);
wherein, the condition for ending a course comprises coming to a scheduled end time of live stream or receiving a course ending instruction (Tseng, Paragraph 31, if there is no more shareable content (i.e., course ending instruction), the video conference is ended).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claims 9, Rosenberg disclosed:
A system for implementing remote conference (Paragraph 9, video conference meeting), characterized in that the system comprises a processor in communication with a memory storing instructions that when executed by the processor, provide (Paragraph 14, processor. Paragraph 56, memory):
a multimedia acquisition module (Figure 1, I/O module 220), a processing control module (Figure 1, processor 210), and a WIFI module and an antenna interface (Paragraph 10, Internet) which are arranged integrally and locally (Figure 1, all located within the video conference server 200);
the multimedia module is configured to collect a first multimedia signal both on-site and from remote (Figure 1, showing on-site and remote) in real time (Paragraph 15, I/O module transmits/receives) and transmit the first multimedia signal to the processing control module (Figure 1, I/O module 220 to processor 210), wherein the first multimedia signal both on-site and from remote at least comprises a video signal of the live streamer's courseware, a video signal of the live streamer's live stream image, an audio signal of the live streamer and a video signal of the image of on-site participants (Paragraph 15, I/O module transmits and receives data to and from devices in communication with the video conference server and is used to facilitate the meeting between users of video conference participant devices. Paragraph 19, I/O module 220 (of video conference server) sends and receives audio/video data between participants of the meeting; received video is displayed, camera provides video data to be sent to other participants; speakers play received audio data; and microphone provides audio input to be sent to other participants);
the WIFI module (Paragraph 10, Internet) and the antenna interface are configured to connect to a wireless controller (Figure 1, video conference application 260) for receiving an operation instruction transmitted from the wireless controller and sending the operation instruction to the processing control module (Figure 1, showing the video conference application 260 in communication with the processor 210. Paragraph 10, the audio/video data produced by the video conference participant devices are forwarded to the video conference server via the Internet such as a WAN, LAN, mobile network, or landline network (i.e., including antennas));
the processing control module is configured to receive and process the first multimedia signal to obtain a second multimedia signal, and send the processed second multimedia signal to the multimedia acquisition module (Paragraph 15, the I/O module transmits data to and from the video conference server. Paragraph 21, the video conference server (using the processor 210) aggregates the video and audio data received (i.e., first multimedia signal) from multiple video conference participant devices into a single data stream (i.e., processed second multimedia signal); and
the multimedia acquisition module further comprises at least one set of multimedia output interfaces, configured to connect to, and transmit the processed second multimedia signal received from the processing control module to, a multimedia display device arranged locally and/or remotely for display (Paragraph 15, the I/O module transmits and receives data to and from devices in communication with the video conference server 200. The video conference server uses the I/O module to facilitate the video conference meeting between users of video conference participant devices per instructions received from video conference application 260);
wherein, the processing control module is configured to: when the remote conference is in live streamer only (Paragraph 24, presenter not currently sharing content), collecting an image video signal (Figure 1, camera 130) of the live streamer and an audio signal (Figure 1, microphone 150) of the live streamer and send them to a remote output device (Figure 1, video conference server 200) for output after processing (Paragraph 21, aggregating audio/video data) (Paragraph 19, I/O module 220 (of video conference server) sends and receives audio/video data between participants of the meeting; received video is displayed, camera provides video data to be sent to other participants; speakers play received audio data; and microphone provides audio input to be sent to other participants. Paragraph 21, video conference server aggregates video and audio from participants and provides the video and audio data to video conference clients. Paragraph 24, while sharing of desktop content is a popular feature of video conference meetings, it is not always relevant. The presenter may not be currently sharing any desktop content (i.e., live streamer only). Figure 1 showing presenter 100A sharing their video feed with participant 100B);
when the remote conference is in live streamer plus shared content (Paragraph 24, content shared from presenter’s desktop), collect and process the image video signal of the live streamer (Paragraph 23, presenter’s image has been received), a video information of the live stream content (Paragraph 24, content shared has been received) and the audio signal (Paragraph 25, audio data) of the live streamer (Paragraphs 23-25, verifying that the presenter’s image, content shared from the presenter’s desktop, and audio data produced by the presenter has been properly received);
transmit the video information of the live stream content to a local display device (Figure 1, 100D) for display (Figure 1, participant 100D showing content being shared on their display); and
send the processed image video signal of the live streamer, the processed video information of the live stream content and the processed audio signal of the live streamer to a remote output device for output (Paragraph 21, Figure 1, video conference server takes the video and audio data and aggregates it into a single data stream and transmits to video conference clients).
While Rosenberg disclosed instances where the participants are sharing content or not (see above), Rosenberg did not explicitly disclose specific modes. Specifically, Rosenberg did not explicitly disclose the mode of live streamer only and the mode of live streamer plus shared content.
However, in an analogous art, Tseng disclosed the mode of live streamer only and the mode of live streamer plus shared content (Paragraph 20, in a video conference, the sharing terminal transmits video frames captured by the video camera and audio signals captured by the microphone to a plurality of remote terminals through the network. The remote terminals receive images of user/users in front of the video camera (i.e., live streamer only). This is considered the video status of the video conference. When the sharing terminal changes from sharing the video frames with the remote terminals to sharing sharable content, the sharing terminal triggers a switch event which is now changed from video status to sharing status (i.e., live streamer plus shared content) of the video conference).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg with Tseng because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modes of Tseng with the teachings of Rosenberg in order to improve the efficiency of the video conference (Tseng, Paragraph 7).
While Rosenberg and Tseng disclosed participants (see above), they did not explicitly disclose a video signal of the image of on-site students; and wherein the local display device and the remote output device present different content, and wherein the local display device displays only the video information of the live stream content without displaying the image video of the live streamer.
However, in an analogous art, Saleh disclosed a video signal of the image of on-site students (Paragraph 3, classroom includes instructor facing a group of students);
wherein the local display device and the remote output device present different content (Figure 3, Paragraph 24, showing a local display device 308 and a remote display device 358. Local display device displays remote participants and the remote display device displays the local participants (i.e., different content));
wherein the local display device displays only the video information of the live stream content without displaying the image video of the live streamer (Figure 3, Paragraph 24, showing a local display device 308 and a remote display device 358. Local display device displays remote participants and the remote display device displays the local participants (i.e., different content)).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg and Tseng with Saleh because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the differences in local and remote displays of Saleh with the teachings of Rosenberg and Tseng in order to further enhance the distance learning experience (Saleh, Paragraph 35).
While Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh disclose a local and remote display device displaying different content (see above), Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh did not explicitly disclose the remote output device outputs both the image video of the live streamer and a shared content screen.
However, in an analogous art, Kenoyer disclosed the remote output device outputs both the image video of the live streamer and a shared content screen (Paragraph 22, computer screen showing a PowerPoint presentation. Paragraph 23, allowing a presenter to stream a compressed and scaled image from a computer screen to a videoconferencing system. The videoconferencing system displays the scaled image as a live graphic on a remote monitor (i.e., remote output device). The remote monitor shows a live view of the presenter (i.e., image video of the live streamer) and the computer screen at the same time).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh with Kenoyer because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the remote output device outputting both image video of the live streamer and shared content of Kenoyer with the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh in order to dynamically share bandwidth (Kenoyer, Paragraph 23).
Regarding claim 11, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the video information of the live stream content comprises a video signal of a live streamer's courseware (Saleh, Paragraph 6, displaying educational data content (i.e., courseware)).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the method further comprises collecting a video signal of the image of on-site students and transmitting the video signal of the image of on-site students to the remote output device (Saleh, Figure 3, Paragraph 24, showing a local display device 308 and a remote display device 358. Local display device displays remote participants and the remote display device displays the local participants).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the collecting is performed in real time by a multimedia acquisition module (Saleh, Paragraph 2, distance education delivered live (i.e., real time)).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the method further comprises receiving an operation instruction from a wireless controller via a WIFI module and an antenna interface (Rosenberg, Paragraph 10, using the Internet to forward audio/video data. Paragraph 22, data stream includes a request submitted by the presenter to verify receipt and accurate presentation of the audio/video data).
Regarding claim 15, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the sending to the remote output device is performed via at least one set of multimedia output interfaces (Saleh, Paragraph 3, capturing audio/video data and transmitting them to their respective locations).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the processing comprises receiving and processing a first multimedia signal to obtain a second multimedia signal by a processing control module (Rosenberg, Paragraph 21, aggregating audio/video data, this creates the data stream now to send).
Regarding claim 17, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the image video signal of the live streamer comprises a video signal of the live streamer's live stream image (Saleh, Figure 4B, Paragraph 35, the remote classroom includes display screen 452 which displays the image of the instructor (i.e., live streamer) which can be a life sized image of the instructor).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the collecting of the image video signal of the live streamer and the audio signal of the live streamer is performed both on-site and from remote (Saleh, Paragraph 3, videoconferencing equipment captures both audio and video media at their respective locations).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the method realizes display of different live stream screen content in different modes (Tseng, Paragraph 20, when the sharing terminal changes from sharing the video frames with the remote terminals to sharing sharable content, the sharing terminal triggers a switch event which is now changed from video status to sharing status).
Regarding claim 20, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer disclosed:
characterized in that the remote output device comprises a multimedia display device arranged remotely for display (Saleh, Paragraph 35, remote display screen 452 displays an image of the instructor).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
8. Claims 3, 4, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenberg (US 2017/0070702) in view of Tseng et al. (US 2013/0194376), Saleh et al. (US 2011/0050842), Kenoyer et al. (US 2016/0028995), and Faulkner (US 2019/0004639).
Regarding claim 3, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. While Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh disclosed the remote conference being in live streamer only or live streamer plus shared content modes (see above), Rosenberg, Tseng, and Saleh did not explicitly disclose:
when the remote conference is in the mode of live streamer only, the collecting and analyzing the image video signal of the live streamer comprises: when there is no portrait image in the image video of the live streamer, sending a default image to replace the image video of the live streamer; and when the remote conference is in the mode of live streamer plus shared content, the step of collecting and analyzing the image video signal of the live streamer comprises: when there is no portrait image in the image video of the live streamer, sending a default content to replace the image video of the live streamer.
However, in an analogous art, Faulkner disclosed when the remote conference is in the mode of live streamer only, the collecting and analyzing the image video information of the live streamer comprises:
when there is no portrait image in the image video of the live streamer, sending a default image to replace the image video of the live streamer (Paragraph 4, a living avatar is created that is associated with the user. Live video may be used in place of the avatar. Paragraph 40, the avatar performs movements when no movement is detected (i.e., no portrait image) in the received live data or when live data associated with the user is unavailable); and
when the remote conference is in the mode of live streamer plus shared content, the collecting and analyzing the image video information of the live streamer comprises:
when there is no portrait image in the image video of the live streamer, sending a default content to replace the image video of the live streamer (Paragraph 4, a living avatar is created that is associated with the user. Live video may be used in place of the avatar. Paragraph 29, during a virtual meeting, the meeting server receives live video/audio data. Paragraph 32, the live data includes a live video stream of the user interacting with the first computing device. Paragraph 38, the object includes live video associated with the user, allowing the user to see and hear the words, actions and reactions of the user as the user participates in the virtual meeting (i.e., shared content). Paragraph 39, alternatively, a live/living avatar is generated based on the received live data. The living avatar resembles the user which is represents. Paragraph 40, the avatar performs default movements (i.e., default content) when no movement is detected in the received live data or when live data associated with the user is unavailable).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer with Faulkner because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the default image and content of Faulkner with the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer in order to easily identify the user (Faulkner, Paragraph 29).
Regarding claim 4, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer did not explicitly disclose:
the method further comprises: recording the conference video displayed at a remote end in real time, and sending the recorded conference video to a cloud server for storage.
However, in an analogous art, Faulkner disclosed the method further comprises: recording the conference video displayed at a remote end in real time, and sending the recorded conference video to a cloud server for storage (Paragraph 18, functionality of the meeting distributed among multiple devices and servers providing a cloud environment. Paragraph 45, the virtual meetings are recorded and allows user to replay the meeting).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer with Faulkner because the references involve remote conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the recording of the conference of Faulkner with the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer in order to provide a collaborative environment to users so that they can play back at later times (Faulkner, Paragraph 33).
9. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenberg (US 2017/0070702) in view of Tseng et al. (US 2013/0194376), Saleh et al. (US 2011/0050842), Kenoyer et al. (US 2016/0028995), and Alshawi (US 5,815,196).
Regarding claim 8, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer did not explicitly disclose:
the method further comprises: based on settings of a local playing device and a remote playing device, a collected original audio signal of the remote conference is converted into target language subtitles and displayed.
However, in an analogous art, Alshawi disclosed the method further comprises: based on settings of a local playing device and a remote playing device, a collected original audio signal of the remote conference is converted into target language subtitles and displayed (Column 3, Lines 38-53, Figure 2, a sending party sends a signal to a receiving party, the signal is decoded into audio/video. The audio signal is converted into text, which is then translated into a target language and the target language text is overlaid as subtitles onto the video signal).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, and Kenoyer with Faulkner because the references involve video conferencing, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the translation into subtitles of Alshawi with the teachings of Rosenberg, Tseng, Saleh, Kenoyer in order to allow for individuals who speak different languages to be able to easily communicate (Alshawi, Column 1, Lines 13-15).
Conclusion
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 Steven C. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-5663. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7AM - 3PM and alternatively, through e-mail at Steven.Nguyen2@USPTO.gov.
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, Christopher Parry can be reached at 571-272-8328. 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.
/S.C.N/Examiner, Art Unit 2451
/Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights