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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 and 13-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 1-2 and 11-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3 and 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,266,341. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are obvious variant of each other.
Instant application 19/069,393
Claim 1: A computer-implemented method, comprising:
US Patent 12,266,341
Claim 1: A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, from a user device, first input data;
receiving, from a user device, first audio data;
processing the first input data to determine the first input data corresponds to a first request to send a media comment;
performing speech processing using the first audio data to determine first intent data representing a request to receive first media content;
determining a first identifier of first media content corresponding to the first request;
receiving, from the user device, a first identifier corresponding to the first media content;
determining, using the first identifier, a first system component corresponding to a source of the first media content;
sending, to a first system component corresponding to the first media content, first data representing a request to send the first media content to the user device;
causing presentation of an output representing an instruction to begin providing the media comment;
causing, by the second system component, the user device to output first synthesized speech representing a first indication to begin recording the media comment;
receiving second input data representing a natural language input comprising the media comment; and
receiving, from the user device, second audio data; and
sending, to the first system component, a notification that a new media comment is available.
sending, to the third system component based on the second indication, a notification that a new media comment is available.
Claim 2: The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
Claim 1:
sending, to a second system component, first data representing a second request to receive the media comment from the user device; and
in response to determining the second intent data, sending, to a second system component, second data representing a request to receive the media comment from the user device;
receiving the first identifier in response to sending the first data.
determining, using the first identifier, to send the media comment to a third system component associated with a creator of the first media content;
Claim 11: A system comprising:
Claim 12: A system comprising:
at least one processor; and
at least one processor; and
at least one memory comprising instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the system to:
at least one memory including instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the system to:
receive, from a user device, first input data;
receive, from a user device, first audio data;
process the first input data to determine the first input data corresponds to a first request to send a media comment;
process the first audio data to determine first intent data representing a request to send a media comment;
determine a first identifier of first media content corresponding to the first request;
receive a first identifier of first media content output by the user device;
determine, using the first identifier, a first system component corresponding to a source of the first media content;
in response to determining the first intent data, send, to a first system component, first data representing a request to receive the media comment from the user device;
cause presentation of an output representing an instruction to begin providing the media comment;
cause the user device to output first synthesized speech representing an instruction to begin recording the media comment;
receive second input data representing a natural language input comprising the media comment; and
receive second audio data representing the media comment; and
send, to the first system component, a notification that a new media comment is available.
send, to the second system component, a notification that a new media comment is available.
Claim 12: The system of claim 11, wherein the at least one memory further comprises instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the system to:
Claim 12:
sending, to a second system component, first data representing a second request to receive the media comment from the user device; and
in response to determining the first intent data, send, to a first system component, first data representing a request to receive the media comment from the user device;
receiving the first identifier in response to sending the first data.
determine, using the first identifier, a second system component corresponding to a creator of the first media content;
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IBRAHIM SIDDO whose telephone number is (571)272-4508. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30PM.
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, Akwasi Sarpong can be reached at 5712703438. 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.
/IBRAHIM SIDDO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights