Detailed Action
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/25/25,9/19/25 has been considered.
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. 12,368,762(18/533,293). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because ‘762 teaches the instant claims and/or the limitations are well known and obvious in the art.
Instant claims
12,368,762
1. A method, comprising:
transmitting a request to participate in a conference, wherein the request includes an identifier; and
receiving first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receiving second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined based on the identifier to prevent a bypass of assigned policy rules.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising performing the method at a user device.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the request comprises transmitting the request to initiate or join the conference.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the identifier is a user identifier or a device identifier.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising receiving a code from a server, wherein the code is a device identifier.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the request comprises associating an internet protocol (IP) address with the request, wherein the IP address acts as a device identifier.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the request comprises transmitting the request to network equipment that adds a token to the request, wherein the token is a device identifier.
8. An apparatus, comprising:
a transceiver configured to: transmit a request to participate in a conference, wherein the request includes an identifier; and
receive first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receive second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined based on the identifier to prevent a bypass of assigned policy rules.
9. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the transceiver is further configured to:receive a code that is associated with a device identifier.
10. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the request includes an internet protocol (IP) address.
11. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the request includes a token.
12. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are further determined based on a policy database that includes a plurality of identifiers associated with a plurality of meeting controls.
13. The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the policy database includes account, group, and user sections and the first identifier identifies meeting controls in a selected section.
14. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the identifier is a device identifier.
15. A non-transitory computer-readable medium including stored instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising:
transmitting a request to participate in a conference, wherein the request includes an identifier; and
receiving first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receiving second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined based on the identifier to prevent a bypass of assigned policy rules.
16. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform operations further comprising: transmitting the request with a code.
17. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform operations further comprising: transmitting the request with an internet protocol (IP) address.
18. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform operations further comprising: transmitting the request with a token.
19. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are further determined based on a policy database includes a plurality of identifiers associated with a plurality of meeting controls.
20. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, wherein the identifier is a device identifier.
1. A method for receiving user meeting controls, the method comprising: transmitting a request to participate in a conference, wherein the request includes a first identifier; and
receiving first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receiving second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined from a policy database that includes an account section, a group section, and a user section, the determination based on the account section and the first identifier to prevent bypass of assigned policy rules.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising performing the method at a user device.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the request comprises transmitting the request to initiate or join the conference.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the first identifier is a user identifier or a device identifier.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising receiving a code from a server, wherein the code is a device identifier.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the request comprises associating an internet protocol (IP) address with the request, wherein the IP address acts as a device identifier.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the request comprises transmitting the request to network equipment that adds a token to the request, wherein the token is a device identifier.
8. An apparatus for receiving user meeting controls, the apparatus comprising:
a transceiver configured to: transmit a request to participate in a conference, wherein the request includes a first identifier; and
receive first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receive second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined from a policy database that includes an account section, a group section, and a user section, the determination based on the account section and the first identifier to prevent bypass of assigned policy rules.
9. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the transceiver is further configured to: receive a code that is associated with a device identifier.
10. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the request includes an internet protocol (IP) address.
11. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the request includes a token.
12. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the policy database that includes a plurality of identifiers associated with a plurality of meeting controls.
13. The apparatus of claim 12, wherein the policy database includes account, group, and user sections and the first identifier identifies meeting controls in a selected section.
14. The apparatus of claim 8, wherein the first identifier is a device identifier.
15. A non-transitory computer-readable medium including stored instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations comprising:
transmitting a request to participate in a conference, wherein the request includes a first identifier; and
receiving first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receiving second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined from a policy database that includes an account section, a group section, and a user section, the determination based on the account section and the first identifier to prevent bypass of assigned policy rules.
16. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform operations further comprising: transmitting the request with a code.
17. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform operations further comprising: transmitting the request with an internet protocol (IP) address.
18. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the instructions cause the processor to perform operations further comprising: transmitting the request with a token.
19. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 15, wherein the policy database includes a plurality of identifiers associated with a plurality of meeting controls.
20. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, wherein the first identifier is a device identifier.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the first identifier". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear to what “the first identifier” refer to because claims 8,12 does not recite “a first identifier” rather claim 8 recites an identifier and claim 12 recites having a plurality of identifiers, therefore does “the first identifier” refer to claim 8 “an identifier” or does it refer to one of the identifiers from claim 12.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 10, 15, 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cisco User Guide For Cisco Webex Meeting Server Release 4.0, pgs.1-90(5/13/2020)(WebEx)(cited in IDS 6/25/25) in view of US 2008/0126953 issued to Davidson et al.(Davidson).
As per claims 1, 8,15, WebEx teaches method/apparatus/non-transitory computer readable medium for receiving user meeting controls(Fig.5, pg.6, meeting control), the apparatus comprising:
a transceiver configured to: transmit a request to participate in a conference(pg.22,39-42; signing in to account and joining a meeting by entering meeting details such as meeting number, meeting link, video address, host’s personal room ID), wherein the request includes a first identifier(pg.15, teaches a user generating a personal account, pg.22,39-42; signing in to account and joining a meeting by entering meeting details such as meeting number, meeting link, video address, host’s personal room ID); and receiving meeting controls for use during the network conference(Fig.5, pg.6, meeting control).
WebEx however does not explicitly teach receive first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receive second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined based on the identifier to prevent a bypass of assigned policy rules.
Davidson teaches receive first meeting controls when the conference is a first conference type and receive second meeting controls when the conference is a second conference type, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are determined based on the identifier to prevent a bypass of assigned policy rules.(para.29; conference participants are determined to be internal or external to a business organization, participants that are internal are assigned a first role, while external participants are assigned a second role, each role encompasses different rights for displaying a particular content(ie meeting controls)); para.30, identifier used to determine role, ie whether the user is internal or external, therefore depending on a particular user the conference is considered to be either internal(first type) or external(second type); the identifier of the user is either the internal or external role which has certain assigned rights(ie id of internal role can display a particular content(3D) while id of external role can display a different content(2D), therefore it obvious to one ordinary skill in the art that given the teachings of the user’s id/control prevents bypassing assigned policy rules, ie id of external role can only display 2D it is prevented from displaying 3D).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify WebEx teachings of user joining a conference and receiving certain meeting controls to include the teaching of Davidson of conference participants are determined to be internal or external to the conference and certain rights/roles are given based on whether the participants are internal or external to the conference in order to provide the predictable result of a user identifier to determine certain rights/roles/meeting control in a particular conference(internal or external).
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to assign certain rights/roles to particular users.
As per claim 2, WebEx in view of Davidson teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising performing the method at a user device(WebEx, pg.22,39-42; signing in to account and joining a meeting by entering meeting details such as meeting number, meeting link, video address, host’s personal room ID, it is obvious to one ordinary skill in the art of conferencing that the user is using a user device in order to sign in to the conference, also Davidson, Fig.1, teaches a client system).
As per claim 3, WebEx in view of Davidson teaches the method of claim 1, wherein transmitting the request comprises transmitting the request to initiate or join the conference(WebEx, pg.22,39-42; joining a meeting by entering meeting details such as meeting number, meeting link, video address, host’s personal room ID).
As per claim 4, WebEx in view of Davidson teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first identifier is user identifier(WebEx, pg.22,39-42; signing in to account and joining a meeting by entering meeting details such as meeting number, meeting link, video address, host’s personal room ID; it is obvious to one ordinary skill in the art that when a user signs into account that the user is using a user ID) or a device identifier.
As per claims 6,10,17, WebEx in view of Davidson teaches the method/apparatus/non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, 8,15, wherein the request includes an internet protocol (IP) address(Davidson, para.30; teaches the use of IP address of each participant). Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of WebEx in view of Davidson of the use of IP address from Davidson in order to provide the predictable result of a request having the IP address . One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to access meetings using IP address.
Claims 5, 9, 14, 16, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cisco User Guide For Cisco Webex Meeting Server Release 4.0, pgs.1-90(5/13/2020)(WebEx)( cited in IDS 6/25/25) in view of US 2008/0126953 issued to Davidson et al.(Davidson) in view of US 9,544,542 issued to Sakurai.
As per claims 5,9,14,16, WebEx in view of Davidson teaches the method/apparatus/non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, 8,15, wherein the transceiver is further configured to: receive a code(WebEx, pg.22,39-42; joining a meeting by entering meeting details such as meeting number, meeting link, video address, host’s personal room ID, pg.16-17, teaches regenerate access codes for accessing meeting) however does not explicitly teach a device identifier which is taught by Sakurai, Fig.2, teaches terminal ID.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of WebEx in view of Davidson to use the access code as taught by WebEx for Sakurai’s terminal ID in order to provide the predictable result of having the access code be associated with the terminal ID.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to access meetings using access codes.
Claims 7,11,18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cisco User Guide For Cisco Webex Meeting Server Release 4.0, pgs.1-90(5/13/2020)(WebEx)( cited in IDS 6/25/25) in view of US 2008/0126953 issued to Davidson et al.(Davidson) in view of US 8,997,222 issued to Meliksetian et al.(Meliksetian) in view of US 9,544,542 issued to Sakurai.
As per claims 7,11,18, WebEx in view of Davidson teaches the method/apparatus/non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, 8,15, however does not explicitly teach wherein transmitting the request comprises transmitting the request to network equipment that adds a token to the request which is taught by Meliksetian col.3, line 65-col.4, line 15; teaches a device for intercepting a request and inserting token into request.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of WebEx in view of Davidson to use the teaching of Meliksetian of intercepting a request to insert a token in order to provide the predictable result of intercepting a request to join a meeting to include a token.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to provide security for meetings and prevent network attack(Meliksetian, col.1, lines 18-20).
WebEx in view of Davidson in view of Meliksetian however does not explicitly teach a device identifier, which is taught by Sakurai, Sakurai, Fig.2, teaches terminal ID.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of WebEx in view of Davidson in view of Meliksetian of intercepting a request to insert a token in order to provide the predictable result of intercepting a request to join a meeting to include a token to use Sakurai’s terminal ID in order to provide the predictable result of intercepting a request to insert a token that is a terminal ID.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to provide security for meetings and prevent network attack(Meliksetian, col.1, lines 18-20).
Claims 12,19, 20, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cisco User Guide For Cisco Webex Meeting Server Release 4.0, pgs.1-90(5/13/2020)(WebEx)( cited in IDS 6/25/25) in view of US 2008/0126953 issued to Davidson et al.(Davidson) in view of US 9,544,542 issued to Sakurai in view of US 2012/0163577 issued to Buford et al.(Buford).
As per claims 12,19, WebEx in view of Davidson teaches the apparatus/non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8,15, wherein the first meeting controls and the second meeting controls are further determined(Davidson, para.29; conference participants are determined to be internal or external to a business organization, participants that are internal are assigned a first role, while external participants are assigned a second role, each role encompasses different rights for displaying a particular content(ie meeting controls)); para.30, identifier used to determine role, ie whether the user is internal or external, therefore depending on a particular user the conference is considered to be either internal(first type) or external(second type); however does not explicitly teach based on a policy database that includes a plurality of identifiers associated with a plurality of meeting controls.
Sakurai explicitly teach a plurality of identifiers associated with a plurality of meeting controls(Fig.2, col.7, lines 30-col.8,lines 49, teaches certain user ID is correlated to role info, where each role can use different functions, ie meeting control and enforcing meeting control).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify WebEx in view of Davidson of using an identifier to determine certain rights/roles/meeting control from a policy database for a user in a particular conference(internal or external) to apply the teaching of Sakurai of certain roles can perform certain meeting control functions and using the identifier for meeting control in order to provide the predictable result of certain rights/roles are given to conference participants based on whether they are internal or external participant based on a particular identifier, where each role is given particular meeting control functions stored in a policy database.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to easily manage a teleconference by the host/presenter and limit certain participants to certain control in meetings.
WebEx in view of Davidson in view of Sakurai does not explicitly teach a policy database, however Sakuri teaches certain user ID is correlated to role info, where each role can use different functions, ie meeting control and enforcing meeting control, therefore it would have been obvious to have a database to store the user’s ID correlations.
Buford explicitly teaches the well known use of a policy database(Fig.2, para.40)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify WebEx in view of Davidson in view of Sakuri of a user identifier to determine certain rights/roles/meeting control in a particular conference(internal or external) to use the well known policy database that stores policies as taught by Buford in order to in order to provide the predictable result of a policy database that stores certain policies such as rights/roles/meeting control for a user in a particular conference(internal or external).
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to assign certain rights/roles to particular users from a policy database which provides a centralized storage/organization of policies.
As per claim 20, WebEx in view of Davidson in view of Sakurai in view of Buford teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, wherein the identifier is a device identifier(Sakurai, Fig.2, teaches terminal ID.). Motivation to combine set forth in claim 19.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and overcoming the double patent rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
US 9,973,551 issued to Ouyang et al., teaches meeting control for teleconference
US 10,284,609 issued to Malatesha et al., different capabilities and privileges for computing devices for meeting
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BACKHEAN TIV whose telephone number is (571)272-5654. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Thurs. 5:30-3:30.
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, TONIA DOLLINGER can be reached on (571) 272-4170. 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.
/BACKHEAN TIV/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2459
Prosecution Insights