DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims:
Claims 1 – 20 are pending.
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) was submitted on 03/04/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 1 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 – 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,267,370. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patent anticipates the invention claimed in the pending application.
Pending Application (19/069,936)
U.S. Patent (12,267,370)
1. A method, comprising:
detecting, by a processing device, a client device within a space, the client device being associated with a participant of a communication session;
1. A method, comprising:
detecting, by a processing device within a space, a client device within the space, the client device being associated with a participant of a current communication session;
receiving, by the processing device, a user input indicating a change in function for the communication session; and
receiving, at the processing device, a user input corresponding to the client device, the user input indicating a change in function for the current communication session;
(*Claim 2, The method of claim 1, further comprising: correlating, at the processing device, the user input with one or more additional user inputs from other client devices within the space, wherein applying the change in function is further based on the correlation.)
correlating, at the processing device, the user input with one or more additional user inputs corresponding to other client devices within the space; and
applying, by the processing device, the change in function based on the user input to modify one or more aspects of the communication session.
applying the change in function based on the correlation to modify one or more aspects of the communication session.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 9 – 12, and 15 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vander May (US 9893902).
As per claim 1, a method, comprising:
detecting, by a processing device, a client device within a space, the client device being associated with a participant of a communication session (Server 30 (processing device) may provide communication sessioning capabilities in accordance with one aspect of this disclosure. For example, server 30 may manage a six-way teleconference or video conference between computing device 20-1 and computing devices 20-2 through 20-6, See Col. 4, Line 66 – Col. 5, Line 12);
receiving, by the processing device, a user input indicating a change in function for the communication session (Computing device 20-1 may issue one or more mute commands 22 (user input) identifying computing device 20-4 to be muted (change in function). A mute command 22 is a signal that instructs one or more computing devices 20-1 through 20-6, server 30, See Col. 8, Line 58 – Col. 9, Line 3); and
applying, by the processing device, the change in function based on the user input to modify one or more aspects of the communication session (A mute command 22 may also identify which computing devices 20-1 through 20-6 will not output audio signals from the computing device identified to be muted by the mute command 22. For example, only certain participants in the communication session may mute the identified computing device, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17).
As per claim 2, the method of claim 1, further comprising: correlating, at the processing device, the user input with one or more additional user inputs from other client devices within the space, wherein applying the change in function is further based on the correlation (In other situations, the one or more mute commands 22 (user input with additional user inputs) mute the identified computing device for all computing devices in the communication session, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17).
As per claim 9, a communication system comprising one or more processors configured to perform operations comprising:
detecting, by a processing device, a client device within a space, the client device being associated with a participant of a communication session (Server 30 (processing device) may provide communication sessioning capabilities in accordance with one aspect of this disclosure. For example, server 30 may manage a six-way teleconference or video conference between computing device 20-1 and computing devices 20-2 through 20-6, See Col. 4, Line 66 – Col. 5, Line 12);
receiving, by the processing device, a user input indicating a change in function for the communication session (Computing device 20-1 may issue one or more mute commands 22 (user input) identifying computing device 20-4 to be muted (change in function). A mute command 22 is a signal that instructs one or more computing devices 20-1 through 20-6, server 30, See Col. 8, Line 58 – Col. 9, Line 3); and
applying, by the processing device, the change in function based on the user input to modify one or more aspects of the communication session (A mute command 22 may also identify which computing devices 20-1 through 20-6 will not output audio signals from the computing device identified to be muted by the mute command 22. For example, only certain participants in the communication session may mute the identified computing device, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17).
As per claim 10, the communication system of claim 9, further comprising:
receiving one or more additional user inputs from other client devices within the space (In other situations, the one or more mute commands 22 (additional user inputs) mute the identified computing device for all computing devices in the communication session, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17); and
correlating the user input with the one or more additional user inputs based on one or more administrative settings applied by an authorized administrator, wherein the applying the change in function is further based on the correlation (Authorization module 10 may also authorize computing device 20-1 to issue mute commands 22 … authorization module 10 provides remote muting functionality to computing device 20-1 … every computing device 20-1 through 20-6 may be authorized to issue mute commands 22, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17).
As per claim 11, the communication system of claim 9, further comprising:
receiving one or more additional user inputs from other client devices within the space (In other situations, the one or more mute commands 22 (additional user inputs) mute the identified computing device for all computing devices in the communication session, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17); and
correlating the user input with the one or more additional user inputs such that all user inputs are given equal precedent with respect to changes in functions indicated by the user inputs (Every computing device 20-1 through 20-6 may be authorized to issue mute commands 22, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17).
As per claim 12, the communication system of claim 9, the one or more processors being further configured to perform the operation of: notifying the participant of a modification of the one or more aspects of the communication session due to the change in function being applied (An option to prevent a participant from being muted may appear on a display device of the participant's device. For example, a pop-up, butter-bar (e.g., a visually displayed line of text providing information) or other overlay may provide an option to cancel muting a participant within a selected time period. A muted participant may be able to cancel their mute at any time during the communication session. Sounds in the communication session, including speaking or unwanted noises, may be identified, See Col. 3, Lines 32 - 43).
As per claim 15, the communication system of claim 9, wherein the user input comprises an interaction, by the participant, with a user interface element displayed at the client device, wherein receiving the user input comprises: receiving the user input from an application running on the client device (If the communication session is a video conference, as in FIG. 1, user 14 may issue a mute command by interacting with information associated with the participant user 14 wishes to mute. If display device 4 is a touch-sensitive screen, user 14 may tap on the image associated with the user in images 19 or in participant information 18 to mute a participant. If display device 4 is not a touch-sensitive screen, user 14 may interact with the image associated with the participant in images 19 or in participant information 18 in other ways, for example, with one or more input devices 52, such as a mouse or keyboard, See Col. 17, Lines 10 - 24).
As per claim 16, a non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions, comprising:
instructions for detecting, by a processing device, a client device within a space, the client device being associated with a participant of a communication session (Server 30 (processing device) may provide communication sessioning capabilities in accordance with one aspect of this disclosure. For example, server 30 may manage a six-way teleconference or video conference between computing device 20-1 and computing devices 20-2 through 20-6, See Col. 4, Line 66 – Col. 5, Line 12);
instructions for receiving, at the processing device, a user input, the user input indicating a change in function for the communication session (Computing device 20-1 may issue one or more mute commands 22 (user input) identifying computing device 20-4 to be muted (change in function). A mute command 22 is a signal that instructs one or more computing devices 20-1 through 20-6, server 30, See Col. 8, Line 58 – Col. 9, Line 3); and
instructions for applying the change in function based on the user input to modify one or more aspects of the communication session (A mute command 22 may also identify which computing devices 20-1 through 20-6 will not output audio signals from the computing device identified to be muted by the mute command 22. For example, only certain participants in the communication session may mute the identified computing device, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17).
As per claim 17, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the user input comprises an interaction, by the participant, with a user interface element displayed at the client device, and wherein the instructions for receiving the user input comprise: instructions for receiving the user input from an application running on the client device (If the communication session is a video conference, as in FIG. 1, user 14 may issue a mute command by interacting with information associated with the participant user 14 wishes to mute. If display device 4 is a touch-sensitive screen, user 14 may tap on the image associated with the user in images 19 or in participant information 18 to mute a participant. If display device 4 is not a touch-sensitive screen, user 14 may interact with the image associated with the participant in images 19 or in participant information 18 in other ways, for example, with one or more input devices 52, such as a mouse or keyboard, See Col. 17, Lines 10 - 24).
As per claim 18, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the user input comprises an interaction, by the participant, with a user interface element displayed at the client device, wherein the instructions further comprise:
instructions for receiving one or more additional user inputs from other client devices within the space (In other situations, the one or more mute commands 22 (additional user inputs) mute the identified computing device for all computing devices in the communication session, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17); and
instructions for correlating the user input with the one or more additional user inputs, wherein the instructions for applying the change in function further include instructions for applying the change in function based on the correlation (In other situations, the one or more mute commands 22 (additional user inputs) mute the identified computing device for all computing devices in the communication session, See Col. 9, Lines 4 - 17).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4 – 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vander May (US 9893902) and in view of Moeeni (US 9866793).
As per claim 4, Vander May discloses all limitations of claim 1.
Vander May however does not expressly disclose:
the method of claim 1, wherein detecting the client device within the space comprises: detecting, by the processing device, a position of the client device within the space.
Moeeni discloses:
the method of claim 1, wherein detecting the client device within the space comprises: detecting, by the processing device, a position of the client device within the space (The identifier 103 can also include … digital device identification (client device) that communicates either wired or wireless transmission through software or an application. The identifier detector 101 (processing device) is capable of detecting the identifier 103. The identifier detector 101 detects the identifier 103 (determines position) which is associated with an ID for the system, See Col. 6, Lines 24 - 35).
It would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the Applicant's effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Moeeni’s teaching of detecting a position of a client device, along with detecting a client device within a space to improve Vander May’s system. Vander May and Moeeni disclose systems for video conferencing for collaboration over a network. Moeeni’s system includes an identifier detector for detecting the position of a client device based on an identifier. The combination is an improvement upon the existing system because a client device can be detected within a space, as taught by Vander May, where the detection can further include the position of the client device, as taught by Moeeni, to allow a system for locating users within a virtual collaboration space.
As per claim 5, the method of claim 1, wherein detecting the client device within the space comprises: receiving, by the processing device and from the client device, a location of the client device (Moeeni, Each user may also be associated with an identifier, such as a device ID, including but not limited to Tag ID 200 of an identifier tag, an identification code established by identification device, etc. The system can then determine which users to transmit the audio/video data based upon the users who are associated with the identifier, Tag ID 200, of the detected identifier tag detected at a particular zone (location), See Col. 8, Lines 45 - 60).
As per claim 6, the method of claim 1, wherein applying the change in function comprises:
detecting, by the processing device, a position of the client device within the space (Moeeni, Each zone 110, 112, 114, 116 is monitored by one or more sensors/identifier detectors, including but not limited to tag detectors, readers, identification device readers, RFID antennas. Antennas 105 are connected to one or more RFID readers 104, See Col. 8, Lines 15 - 27); and
directing based on the detected position, one or more parameters of an interconnected camera to be modified (Moeeni, To capture the activities occurring at a specified location, a set of one or more cameras envelop each of several points of interest or activities. In one embodiment, at least one camera and/or microphone is associated with each zone to capture audio and/or video of the activities occurring within each zone, See Col. 8, Lines 15 - 27).
As per claim 19, the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the instructions for detecting the client device within the space comprise: instructions for detecting, by the processing device, a position of the client device within the space (Moeeni, The identifier 103 can also include … digital device identification (client device) that communicates either wired or wireless transmission through software or an application. The identifier detector 101 (processing device) is capable of detecting the identifier 103. The identifier detector 101 detects the identifier 103 (determines position) which is associated with an ID for the system, See Col. 6, Lines 24 - 35).
Claim(s) 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vander May (US 9893902) and in view of Jorasch (US 11665284).
As per claim 13, Vander May discloses all limitations of claim 9,
Vander May however does not expressly disclose:
providing a user interface to facilitate a configuration of a custom user input defined by the participant, wherein the user input is recognized as the custom user input defined by the participant.
Jorasch discloses:
the communication system of claim 9, further comprising: providing a user interface to facilitate a configuration of a custom user input defined by the participant, wherein the user input is recognized as the custom user input defined by the participant (In various embodiments, prior to a meeting, a user may interact with a program or app for assigning custom meanings to gestures. The custom meanings may be stored in association with the user and the gesture, Col. 141, Lines 31 - 37).
It would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill in the art before the Applicant's effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Jorasch’s teaching of a custom user input defined by a participant, along with a user input indicating a change in function for the communication session to improve Vander May’s system. Vander May and Jorasch disclose systems for video conferencing for collaboration over a network. Jorasch’s system includes assigning a custom meaning to gestures to customize user inputs. The combination is an improvement upon the existing system because a user input indicating a change in function for the communication session can be detected, as taught by Vander May, where the detection can further include a custom user input defined by a participant, as taught by Jorasch, to allow a system for locating users within a virtual collaboration space.
As per claim 14, the communication system of claim 9, wherein the user input comprises a gesture performed by the participant, and wherein receiving the user input comprises: detecting the gesture using a camera communicatively connected to the processing device (Jorasch, When a camera (e.g., camera 7805) subsequently detects the gesture, the camera may identify the user, and look up the associated meaning of the gesture for the identified user, Col. 141, Lines 31 - 37).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 7, 8 and 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZIA NAOREEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7282. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 - 6:00.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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.
/NAZIA NAOREEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Prosecution Insights