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 03/05/2025 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. 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.
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876 (hereinafter ‘876). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims are obvious variations of each other.
Regarding Claim 1 (drawn to a method):
Current Application
Claim 1:
A computer-implemented method executed on data processing hardware that causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first query spoken by a user and captured by a microphone of a computing device associated with the user;
providing, for audible playback from the computing device, a text-to-speech (TTS) output generated by a TTS system associated with the computing device, the TTS output comprising synthesized audio that conveys a response to the first query; and
while the computing device is audibly playing back the TTS output:
receiving an audio signal captured by the microphone that conveys a second query spoken by the user; and
based on receiving the audio signal captured by the microphone that conveys the second query spoken by the user, causing the computing device to switch-off the audible playback of the TTS output.
‘876
Claim 1:
A computer-implemented method executed on data processing hardware that causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first query spoken by a user and captured by a microphone of a computing device associated with the user;
providing, for audible playback from the computing device, a text-to-speech (TTS) output generated by a TTS system associated with the computing device, the TTS output comprising synthesized audio that conveys a response to the first query;
while the computing device is audibly playing back the TTS output:
detecting a barge-in event from the user to provide a second query;
in response to detecting the barge-in event, initiating a reduction in an audio output level of the computing device; and
receiving an audio signal captured by the microphone that conveys the second query spoken by the user; and
providing the audio signal characterizing the second query to a speech recognition engine.
Claim 5:
… wherein initiating the reduction in the audio output level of the computing device comprises providing a control signal to the computing device that causes the computing device to switch-off audible playback of the TTS output.
Regarding Claim 1 (drawn to a method):
Current Application
Claim 11:
A system comprising:
data processing hardware; and
memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware and storing instructions that when executed on the data processing hardware causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first query spoken by a user and captured by a microphone of a computing device associated with the user;
providing, for audible playback from the computing device, a text-to-speech (TTS) output generated by a TTS system associated with the computing device, the TTS output comprising synthesized audio that conveys a response to the first query; and
while the computing device is audibly playing back the TTS output:
receiving an audio signal captured by the microphone that conveys a second query spoken by the user; and
based on receiving the audio signal captured by the microphone that conveys the second query spoken by the user, causing the computing device to switch-off the audible playback of the TTS output.
‘876
Claim 11:
A system comprising:
data processing hardware; and
memory hardware in communication with the data processing hardware and storing instructions that when executed on the data processing hardware causes the data processing hardware to perform operations comprising:
receiving a first query spoken by a user and captured by a microphone of a computing device associated with the user;
providing, for audible playback from the computing device, a text-to-speech (TTS) output generated by a TTS system associated with the computing device, the TTS output comprising synthesized audio that conveys a response to the first query;
while the computing device is audibly playing back the TTS output:
detecting a barge-in event from the user to provide a second query;
in response to detecting the barge-in event, initiating a reduction in an audio output level of the computing device; and
receiving an audio signal captured by the microphone that conveys the second query spoken by the user; and
providing the audio signal characterizing the second query to a speech recognition engine.
Claim 15:
… wherein initiating the reduction in the audio output level of the computing device comprises providing a control signal to the computing device that causes the computing device to switch-off audible playback of the TTS output.
As shown in the tables above, it is clear that all the elements of the application claims 1 and 11 are to be found in patent claims 1, 5, 11, 15, as the application claims 1 and 11 fully encompasses patent claims 1, 5, 11, 15. The difference between the application claims 1 and 11 and the patent claims 1, 5, 11, 15 lies in the fact that the patent claims includes more elements and is thus more specific. Thus the invention of claims 1, 5, 11, 15 of the patent is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of the application claims 1 and 11. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species”. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Claim 2 of the current application corresponds to the corresponding portion of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 3 of the current application corresponds to claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 4 of the current application corresponds to claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 5 of the current application corresponds to claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 6 of the current application corresponds to claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 7 of the current application corresponds to claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 8 of the current application corresponds to claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 9 of the current application corresponds to claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 10 of the current application corresponds to claim 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876
Claim 12 of the current application corresponds to the corresponding portion of claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 13 of the current application corresponds to claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 14 of the current application corresponds to claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 15 of the current application corresponds to claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 16 of the current application corresponds to claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 17 of the current application corresponds to claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 18 of the current application corresponds to claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 19 of the current application corresponds to claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Claim 20 of the current application corresponds to claim 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,254,876.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under nonstatutory double patenting, set forth in this Office Action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 1 and 11 of the current application teaches similar subject matter as the prior art of Muralidhar et al. (US 2014/012800), Percoda et al. (US 8,527,270), and Koverzin et al. (US 2010/0286490). However, the prior art alone or in combination fails to teach “based on receiving the audio signal captured by the microphone that conveys the second query spoken by the user, causing the computing device to switch-off the audible playback of the TTS output” as recited in claims 1 and 11.
Claims 2-10 and 12-20 would be allowed for being dependent on an allowable base claim.
Cited Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Elliot et al. (US 10,038,419) discloses an audio playback system.
Elliot et al. (US 10,200,004) discloses an audio playback system.
Sharifi et al (US 11,688,392) discloses detecting freeze words in audio data and instructing the speech recognizer to cease any active processing on the audio data.
Sharifi et al (US 12,073,826) discloses detecting freeze words in audio data and instructing the speech recognizer to cease any active processing on the audio data.
Shabestary et al, *US 2025/0201259) discloses receiving text-to-speech (TTS) data and outputting synthetic speech using an audio output device of a user device.
Chao et al. (US 2026/02292216) discloses receiving a TTS end event indicating that audible output of first TTS audio from a user device is finished.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SATWANT K SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-7468. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM 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, Paras D Shah can be reached at (571}270-1650. 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.
/SATWANT K SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2653
Prosecution Insights