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 .
Claims Status
Claims 1-30 are currently pending in the application.
.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed 07/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant filed Terminal disclaimer on 07/27/2026, and terminal declaimer review decision on 08/05/2026 was disapproved because the file of the invention on the POA doesn’t correspond with our record (further, see the office action sent on 08/05/2026 by the OPLC). Therefore, the non-statutory double patenting rejection maintained until the proper Terminal Disclaimer is executed.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a non-statutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-30 are additionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over at least claims 1,5,8-10,14,17 and 20 of US 12,382,125 B2 (“the Patent-I”) and claims 1,7-8 and 14-15 US 11,985,376 B2 (“the Patent-II”) in view of US 2021/0021953 A1 to KIM et al. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the current application's claims are only worded in a way that slightly attempts to differ them from the claims of the Patent while still leading to the same inventive outcome/concept.
Claims 1-5, 15-18,23-26 of the pending claims rejected by the claims 1,5,8-10,14,17 and 20 of US 12,382,125 B2 (“the Patent-I”) and claims 1,7-8 and 14-15 US 11,985,376 B2 (“the Patent-II”).
Additionally, although the Patent discloses most of the currently claimed limitations, However, claims 6-14, 19-22,27-30 the Patent does not explicitly disclose.
As to claim 6, the patent does not explicitly discloses wherein generating the first synthetic media content according to the first generative media content model includes generating audio content and wherein generating the second synthetic media content according to the second generative media content model includes generating visual content.
In a related art, Kim discloses wherein generating the first synthetic media content according to the first generative media content model includes generating audio content and wherein generating the second synthetic media content according to the second generative media content model includes generating visual content (see fig.20; page.16, ¶0244).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the Patent and KIM to arrive at the claimed subject matter, by generating an audio/video signal suitable for individual users.
As to claim 7, KIM further discloses wherein generating the first synthetic media content according to the first generative media content model includes generating audio content and wherein generating the second synthetic media content according to the second generative media content model includes generating textual content (see fig.8; page.13, ¶0192-¶0193).
As to claim 8, KIM further discloses wherein generating the first synthetic media content according to the first generative media content model includes generating visual content and wherein generating the second synthetic media content according to the second generative media content model includes generating tactile content (see fig.20; page.16, ¶0244).
As to claim 9, KIM further discloses wherein the first generative media content model comprises a first neural network stored on the network device (see fig.14; page.14, ¶0216).
As to claims 10, 19 and 27, KIM further discloses wherein the second generative media content model comprises a second neural network accessible via a first computing system remote from the network device (see fig.14; page.14, ¶0217).
As to claims 11, 20 and 28, KIM further discloses prior to generating the second synthetic media content, transmitting, via a network interface of the network device, the received one or more input parameters to the first computing system (see fig.14; page.14, ¶0217).
As to claim 12, 21 and 29, KIM further discloses receiving, via a network interface of the network device, an updated first generative media content model from a second computing system different from the first computing system (see fig.11; page.13, ¶0205).
As to claim 13, KIM further discloses wherein generating the second synthetic media content comprises providing the first synthetic media content as an input to the second generative media content model (see page.14, ¶0217).
As to claims 14, 22 and 30, KIM further discloses wherein the one or more input parameters comprise data corresponding to a voice utterance (see page.11, ¶0167-¶0168).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-30 are allowed if the non-statutory obvious type of double patenting rejection is overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0289417 A1 to Tomlin et al.
US 2021/0021953 A1 to KIM et al.
US 2020/0280814 A1 to Taylor et al.
US 11,432,097 B2 to Munoz et al.
US 11, 211,095 B1 to Verbeke et al.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicants are 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 MULUGETA MENGESHA whose telephone number is (469)295-9212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:30PM 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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
MULUGETA MENGESHA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2424
/Mulugeta Mengesha/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights