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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 1 and 7-8 are independent.
Apparent priority is 2 November 2022.
The instant Application is directed to a method of summarizing voice activity and situations of a user.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Step 1: The independent Claims are directed to statutory categories:
Claim 1 is a device claim and directed to the machine or manufacture category of patentable subject matter.
Claim 7 is a method claim and directed to the process category of patentable subject matter.
Claim 8 is a device claim and directed to the machine or manufacture category of patentable subject matter.
Claim 11 is a computer readable medium claim and is directed to the machine or manufacture category of patentable subject matter.
Step 2A, Prong One: Does the Claim recite a Judicially Recognized Exception? Abstract Idea? Are these Claims nevertheless considered Abstract as a Mathematical Concept (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations), Mental Process (concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion), or Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity (1-fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), 2-commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), 3- managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions) and fall under the judicial exception to patentable subject matter?)
The rejected Claims recite Mental Processes.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Additional Elements that Integrate the Judicial Exception into a Practical Application? Identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s), and evaluating those additional elements to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception. “Integration into a practical application” requires an additional element(s) or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Uses the considerations laid out by the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit to evaluate whether the judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
The rejected Claims do not include additional limitations that point to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application and are therefore directed to a Mental Process.
Claim 1 is a generic automation of a mental process because a human agent can summarize a person’s speech activity and situations and create a graphic representing the data. Prong Two of step 2A in the 101 analysis asks whether the abstract idea is integrated with a practical application. The answer is no in this instance because there is no technological solution in the Claim that “integrates” the abstract idea. The Claim only suggests that the abstract idea be applied. It does not describe an application.
Claim 1. A situation display device comprising a display that displays a picture showing a situation of an object person in each partial time section, [supervisor creates a summary of employee’s day and draws a picture for each task]
which is a time section included in a predetermined time section, [summary covers entire workday]
in association with the partial time section, [summary is broken down into 30 minute chunks]
in a vicinity of a two-dimensional graph showing an utterance amount of the object person per unit time in the predetermined time section, [supervisor draws a graph showing how much the employee spoke during the time periods]
with one person who is an object of situation display as the object person. [report is about employee]
Step 2B: Search for Inventive Concept: Additional Element Do not amount to Significantly More: The limitations of “display device” and display” are well-understood, routine, and conventional machine components that are being used for their well-understood, routine, and conventional and rather generic functions. Additionally, these limitations are expressed parenthetically and lack nexus to the Claim language and as such are a separable and divisible mention to a machine. Accordingly, they are not sufficient to cause the Claim to amount to significantly more than the underlying abstract idea.
The Dependent Claims do not add limitations that could help the Claim as a whole to amount to significantly more than the Abstract idea identified for the Independent Claim:
Claim 2. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein the utterance amount of the object person is obtained by performing voice recognition on a sound acquired by a microphone included in a mobile device, and [supervisor listens to the employee’s utterances]
a situation of the object person is obtained using at least sensor information acquired by one or more sensors other than the microphone included in the mobile device. [supervisor visually watches employee’s situation]
Claim 3. The situation display device according to claim 2, wherein the one or more sensors include a position information sensor that acquires position information, the one or more sensors being included in the mobile device, and a situation of the object person is obtained using at least sensor information acquired by the position information sensor. [supervisor notes if employee is at a cubicle or in a conference room]
Claim 4. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein pictures are selectable, and when any one of the pictures is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding a situation and an utterance of the object person in a partial time section corresponding to selected picture. [if auditor points to a picture, supervisor flips to detailed notes on that time of day]
Claim 5. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein the display also displays a ratio display graph that is a graph showing a ratio occupied by time during which the object person was in each situation, and [supervisor draws a graph showing the ratios of situations]
an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person in a situation corresponding to selected area. [if auditor points to a portion of the graph, supervisor flips to detailed notes on that situation]
Claim 6. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein the display also displays a ratio display graph that is a graph showing a ratio occupied by time during which the object person was at each position, and [supervisor draws a graph showing the ratios of locations]
an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person at a position corresponding to selected area. [if auditor points to a portion of the graph, supervisor flips to detailed notes on that location]
The additional limitations introduced by the Dependent Claims are not sufficient as additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or as additional elements that cause the Claim as a whole to amount to substantially more than the underlying abstract idea.
With respect to independent Claim 7, independent Claim 8, and dependent claim 11, which have limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 1, the limitations of “non-transitory computer readable medium” and “processor” are expressed parenthetically and lack nexus to the Claim language and as such are a separable and divisible mention to a machine. Accordingly, they do not include additional limitations that cause the Claim as a whole to amount to more than the underlying abstract idea.
The Dependent Claims 9-10 are similar to claims 5-6 and do not add limitations that could integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or help the Claim as a whole to amount to significantly more than the Abstract idea identified for the Independent Claim.
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) 1-3, 7-8, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moriwaki et al. (US20080255847A1).
Regarding claim 1, Moriwaki discloses: Claim 1. A situation display device comprising a display that displays a picture showing a situation of an object person in each partial time section, (Fig. 1 shows a display MONITOR SCREEN 300. Activity-degree/speech display 310 shows a picture with circles representing the situation of a person, e.g. member A, speaking at different times, as well as an activity degree which also reads on a situation.)
which is a time section included in a predetermined time section, ("[0032] These sensing data pieces are converted into activity data AD used for visualizing the situations of the meeting at a stream data processing unit 100 in the aggregation server 200. The stream data processing unit 100 has windows 110 corresponding to respective data sources, and performs a predetermined numeric operation for time-series data sets stored into the memory for a certain period of time. ")
in association with the partial time section, ("[0034]...In FIG. 1, the discussion activation degree 54 per one minute is exemplified…" )
in a vicinity of a two-dimensional graph showing an utterance amount of the object person per unit time in the predetermined time section, (In fig. 1, the-accumulation-of-speeches 320, shows a 2 dimensional graph showing an utterance amount per person per unit time.)
with one person who is an object of situation display as the object person. (Fig. 3 shows members A through D; any of the users reads on the object person.)
Regarding claim 2, Moriwaki discloses: Claim 2. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein the utterance amount of the object person is obtained by performing voice recognition on a sound acquired by a microphone included in a mobile device, and ("[0038] FIG. 2 shows a processing sequence of representative function modules in the whole diagram shown in FIG. 1. First of all, the sensors (microphones) 20 as voice collecting units obtain voice data (20A)..." )
a situation of the object person is obtained using at least sensor information acquired by one or more sensors other than the microphone included in the mobile device. ("[0043] First of all, a configuration of a wireless sensor node will be described by using FIG. 11. FIG. 11 is a block diagram showing an example of a configuration of a wireless sensor node 70. The wireless sensor node 70 includes a sensor 74 which performs measurement of motions of the members themselves (using an acceleration degree), measurement of voice (using the microphones), and measurement of seated positions (using transmission/reception of infrared rays), a controller 73 which controls the sensor 74, a wireless processing unit 73 which communicates with a wireless base station 76, a power source 71 which supplies electric power to the respective blocks, and an antenna 75 which transmits or receives wireless data. Specifically, an accelerometer 741, a microphone 742, and an infrared ray transmitter/receiver 743 are mounted in the sensor 74." )
Regarding claim 3, Moriwaki discloses: Claim 3. The situation display device according to claim 2, wherein the one or more sensors include a position information sensor that acquires position information, the one or more sensors being included in the mobile device, and a situation of the object person is obtained using at least sensor information acquired by the position information sensor. ("[0043] First of all, a configuration of a wireless sensor node will be described by using FIG. 11. FIG. 11 is a block diagram showing an example of a configuration of a wireless sensor node 70. The wireless sensor node 70 includes a sensor 74 which performs measurement of motions of the members themselves (using an acceleration degree), measurement of voice (using the microphones), and measurement of seated positions (using transmission/reception of infrared rays), a controller 73 which controls the sensor 74, a wireless processing unit 73 which communicates with a wireless base station 76, a power source 71 which supplies electric power to the respective blocks, and an antenna 75 which transmits or receives wireless data. Specifically, an accelerometer 741, a microphone 742, and an infrared ray transmitter/receiver 743 are mounted in the sensor 74." )
Claim 7 is a method claim with limitations corresponding to the limitations of Claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 8, Moriwaki discloses: Claim 8. A situation display device comprising a display that displays a visual expression showing at least one of a situation, a state, or an action of an object person in each partial time section, (Fig. 1 shows a display MONITOR SCREEN 300. Activity-degree/speech display 310 shows a visual expression showing a situation, activity degree, and state or action, speech, for a time index.)
which is a time section included in a predetermined time section, ("[0032] These sensing data pieces are converted into activity data AD used for visualizing the situations of the meeting at a stream data processing unit 100 in the aggregation server 200. The stream data processing unit 100 has windows 110 corresponding to respective data sources, and performs a predetermined numeric operation for time-series data sets stored into the memory for a certain period of time. ")
in association with the partial time section, ("[0034]...In FIG. 1, the discussion activation degree 54 per one minute is exemplified…" )
in a vicinity of a visualized totalization result indicating a situation of human activity obtained from a voice of the object person per unit time in the predetermined time section, (In fig. 1, the-accumulation-of-speeches 320, shows a 2 dimensional graph showing a total utterance amount per person per unit time.)
with one person who is an object of situation display as the object person. (Fig. 3 shows members A through D; any of the users reads on the object person.)
Regarding claim 11, Moriwaki discloses: Claim 11. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the method of claim 7. (“[0029]… It should be noted that the servers such as the voice processing server 40 and the aggregation server 200 are synonymous with normal computer systems, and for example, the aggregation server 200 includes a central processing unit (CPU), a memory unit (a semiconductor memory or a magnetic memory device)…)
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriwaki in view of Gambhir (US 20240022618 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Moriwaki does not explicitly disclose the additional limitations.
Gambhir discloses: Claim 4. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein pictures are selectable, and when any one of the pictures is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding a situation and an utterance of the object person in a partial time section corresponding to selected picture. (Fig. 2B discloses pictures representing highlights of the meeting. See also: "[0055] In some implementations, the user may take certain actions with respect to the icons 244 (or may be provided other menu options) for receiving more information about a meeting event. In an example, hovering over or right-clicking on an icon 244 or indication 242 results in the display of additional information about the meeting event..." )
Moriwaki and Gambhir are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they disclose methods of analyzing meeting data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moriwaki with the teaching of Gambhir to include a timeline with highlights, and to provide additional information regarding the event when clicking on it. Doing so would have been beneficial to enable context retention (Gambhir [0002]) and to allow a user to catch up on important occurrences of a meeting (Gambhir [0019]).
Claim(s) 5 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriwaki in view of Hardy et al. (US 20180365619 A1) and Gambhir.
Regarding claim 5, Moriwaki does not explicitly disclose the additional limitations.
Hardy discloses: Claim 5. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein the display also displays a ratio display graph that is a graph showing a ratio occupied by time during which the object person was in each situation, and ("[0086] In another embodiment, a component may generate a personalized report 704 about the user's meetings. This personalized report 704 may display key indicators, such as a pie chart of the user's percentage of time spent in bad meetings and a computer-generated text summarizing trends and observations in the data, for example." )
an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person in a situation corresponding to selected area. (not explicitly disclosed)
Moriwaki and Hardy are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they disclose methods of analyzing meeting data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moriwaki with the teaching of Hardy to provide a report of the time spent in bad meetings. Doing so would have been beneficial to increase productivity (Hardy [0003]).
Hardy does not explicitly disclose that an area of the graph can be selected to display additional information.
Gambhir discloses: an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person in a situation corresponding to selected area. ("[0055] In some implementations, the user may take certain actions with respect to the icons 244 (or may be provided other menu options) for receiving more information about a meeting event. In an example, hovering over or right-clicking on an icon 244 or indication 242 results in the display of additional information about the meeting event..." ); Gambhir also discloses that a meeting summary is available: “[0019] To address these technical problems and more, in an example, this description provides technical solutions for intelligently monitoring virtual meetings, notifying a meeting attendee when they have been inattentive to a meeting for a given time period, providing a visual summary of significant occurrences during the meeting, and providing a more detailed summary of occurrences at the meeting during a meeting attendee's lack of attention to improve context retention...”)
Moriwaki, Hardy, and Gambhir are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they disclose methods of analyzing meeting data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination with the teaching of Gambhir to provide additional information regarding the meeting when clicking on it. Doing so would have been beneficial to enable context retention (Gambhir [0002]) and to allow a user to catch up on important occurrences of a meeting (Gambhir [0019]).
Regarding claim 9, Moriwaki does not explicitly disclose the additional limitations.
Hardy discloses: Claim 9. The situation display device according to claim 8, wherein the display also displays a ratio display graph that is a graph showing a ratio occupied by time during which the object person was in each situation, and ("[0086] In another embodiment, a component may generate a personalized report 704 about the user's meetings. This personalized report 704 may display key indicators, such as a pie chart of the user's percentage of time spent in bad meetings and a computer-generated text summarizing trends and observations in the data, for example." )
an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person in a situation corresponding to selected area. (not explicitly disclosed)
Moriwaki and Hardy are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they disclose methods of analyzing meeting data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moriwaki with the teaching of Hardy to provide a report of the time spent in bad meetings. Doing so would have been beneficial to increase productivity (Hardy [0003]).
Hardy does not explicitly disclose that an area of the graph can be selected to display additional information.
Gambhir discloses: an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person in a situation corresponding to selected area. ("[0055] In some implementations, the user may take certain actions with respect to the icons 244 (or may be provided other menu options) for receiving more information about a meeting event. In an example, hovering over or right-clicking on an icon 244 or indication 242 results in the display of additional information about the meeting event..." ); Gambhir also discloses that a meeting summary is available: “[0019] To address these technical problems and more, in an example, this description provides technical solutions for intelligently monitoring virtual meetings, notifying a meeting attendee when they have been inattentive to a meeting for a given time period, providing a visual summary of significant occurrences during the meeting, and providing a more detailed summary of occurrences at the meeting during a meeting attendee's lack of attention to improve context retention...”)
Moriwaki, Hardy, and Gambhir are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they disclose methods of analyzing meeting data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination with the teaching of Gambhir to provide additional information regarding the meeting when clicking on it. Doing so would have been beneficial to enable context retention (Gambhir [0002]) and to allow a user to catch up on important occurrences of a meeting (Gambhir [0019]).
Claim(s) 6 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriwaki in view of Gingras et al. (US 20130232150 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Moriwaki does not explicitly disclose the additional limitations.
Gingras discloses: Claim 6. The situation display device according to claim 1, wherein the display also displays a ratio display graph that is a graph showing a ratio occupied by time during which the object person was at each position, and (Fig. 9 shows a chart with the top locations as ratios. )
an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person at a position corresponding to selected area. (“[0118] FIG. 9 is an example of a statistics page 900 presented to the user of an apparatus, such as a client device, including multiple sections, in an example embodiment. The example shown in FIG. 9 includes several sections including different type of statistics generated as statistics data. In particular, in this example, the statistics page 900 includes a personal details section 902, a graph section 904, a statistics summary section 906, a participants section 908, and a meeting locations section 910. One or more of the sections 902, 904, 906, 908 and 910 may be dropped down to view the information presented therein. The user may personalize the statistics page to select the sections that they want displayed therein, and the type of graphs that they want displayed.” See also Fig. 16C shows a summary of meetings. )
Moriwaki and Gingras are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they disclose methods of analyzing meeting data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moriwaki with the teaching of Gingras to show top meeting locations with dropdown information. Doing so would have been beneficial so the user could identify the frequency that events occur at a particular location (Gingras [0070]) and view personalized information (Gingras [0118]).
Regarding claim 10, Moriwaki does not explicitly disclose the additional limitations.
Gingras discloses: Claim 10. The situation display device according to claim 8, wherein the display also displays a ratio display graph that is a graph showing a ratio occupied by time during which the object person was at each position, and (Fig. 9 shows a chart with the top locations as ratios. )
an area of each ratio included in the ratio display graph is selectable, and when any one of areas is selected, display is switched to a display of information regarding an utterance of the object person at a position corresponding to selected area. (“[0118] FIG. 9 is an example of a statistics page 900 presented to the user of an apparatus, such as a client device, including multiple sections, in an example embodiment. The example shown in FIG. 9 includes several sections including different type of statistics generated as statistics data. In particular, in this example, the statistics page 900 includes a personal details section 902, a graph section 904, a statistics summary section 906, a participants section 908, and a meeting locations section 910. One or more of the sections 902, 904, 906, 908 and 910 may be dropped down to view the information presented therein. The user may personalize the statistics page to select the sections that they want displayed therein, and the type of graphs that they want displayed.” See also Fig. 16C shows a summary of meetings. )
Moriwaki and Gingras are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they disclose methods of analyzing meeting data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Moriwaki with the teaching of Gingras to show top meeting locations with dropdown information. Doing so would have been beneficial so the user could identify the frequency that events occur at a particular location (Gingras [0070]) and view personalized information (Gingras [0118]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hori et al. (US 20210280183 A1). Hori discloses a display showing users’ voice activity during a meeting.
Hamasako et al. (US 20240380629 A1). Hamasako discloses a method for displaying the speech amount of each participant as a graph ([0996]).
Kitada et al. (US 20170132518 A1). Kitada discloses a pie chart for the amount of time spent on each meeting on each topic ([0090]).
Dial (US 20200311579 A1). Dial discloses summaries of meetings as well as a chart showing the time spent in meetings or other situations ([0051]; Fig. 7).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JON C MEIS whose telephone number is (703)756-1566. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Hai Phan can be reached at 571-272-6338. 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.
/JON CHRISTOPHER MEIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2654
/HAI PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2654
Prosecution Insights