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
This responds to Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed 08/12/2026. Claims 1, 3, 6, 10-11, 15-16, and 21. Claims 1-21 are now pending in this Application.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/12/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Applicant’s amendment to claims 1, 11 and 21 do not overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101. The amended claim continues to recite “Receiving a plurality of conference, generating a package, saving a package, saving item file may be characterized as mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer” and does not add additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or otherwise amount to significantly more than the exception itself.
Therefore, the rejection of claim 1-21 under 35 U.S.C 101 is maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Gou, Udezue and Mackell do not disclose “wherein the document file is comprised by the package file as a discrete file in the original file type without conversion of the document”.
In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner submits that Udezue discloses “if the data item is a document shared during the event, then any changes made to the document during the event may be identified, and multiple versions or views of the document may be generated, such as an original version, a modified version, and a list of changes” Par [0025]. Original version and modified version have the same original document type. Accordingly, Udezue discloses this limitation.
Therefore, the examiner maintains the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7, 11-12, 15-18, 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al (U.S. Pub No. 2014/0118471 A1), and Udezue et al (U.S. Pub No. 2019/0073640), and further in view of Mackell et al (U.S. Pub No. 2020/0344278 A1).
As per claim 1, Guo discloses a method for facilitating collaboration utilizing video conferencing comprising:
receiving a plurality of conference files related to a video conference, the plurality of conference files comprising: an audio recording file of at least a portion of the video conference (Par [0016-0017, 0047, 0067]);
a video recording file of at least a portion of the video conference (Par [0039-0040]); and
generating a package file comprising the plurality of conference files; saving the package file to a package file database (par [0047]);
processing the package file to generate a derivative conference file (par 0047, 0050]).
Gou does not explicitly disclose generating an item file comprising the derivative conference file; and saving the item file to an item file database, the item file further comprising a link to the package file saved on the package file database, wherein the document file is comprised by the package file as a discrete file in the original file type without conversion of the document.
However, Udezue discloses generating an item file comprising the derivative conference file; and saving the item file to an item file database, the item file further comprising a link to the package file saved on the package file database, wherein the document file is comprised by the package file as a discrete file in the original file type without conversion of the document (Par [0024-0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Udezue into the teaching of Guo in order to improve computer system (Par [0002]).
Udezue discloses a document file shared during the video conference. Guo and Udzue do not explicitly disclose a document file shared in an original file type during the video conference.
However, Mackell discloses a document file shared in an original file type during the video conference (Par [0015, 0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Mackell into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezue in order to maintain an accuracy (Par [0014]).
As per claim 2, Guo discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the audio recording file and the video recording file of the video conference are received as a single file (Par [0047]).
As per claim 4, Udezue discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the derivative conference file is at least one of a transcript of the audio recording file, a task, an action item, a calendar event, and an annotation (Par [0024]).
As per claim 7, Udezue discloses the method of claim 1 wherein: the derivative conference file is one of a task, an action item, a calendar event, and an annotation; and the derivative conference file further comprises metadata comprising a link to a user record stored on a user record database (par [0024]).
As per claim 11, Guo discloses a computer system for facilitating collaboration utilizing video conferencing comprising:
a network communication device operable to: connect to a computer network (Par [0003]),
receive a plurality of conference files related to a video conference, the plurality of conference files comprising: an audio recording file of at least a portion of the video conference (Par [0016-0017, 0047, 0067]),
a video recording file of at least a portion of the video conference (Par [0039, 0040]), and
a processor operable connected to the network communication device; and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium positioned in communication with the processor and the network communication device and comprising software stored thereon that, when executed by the software, is operable to (Par [0044, 0047]):
save the package file to a package file database; process the package file to generate a derivative conference file (Par [0047, 0050]).
Guo does not explicitly disclose generate a package file comprising the plurality of conference files; generate an item file comprising the derivative conference file; and save the item file to an item file database, the item file further comprising a link to the package file saved on the package file database, wherein the document file is comprised by the package file as a discrete file in the original file type without conversion of the document.
However, Udezue discloses generate a package file comprising the plurality of conference files; generate an item file comprising the derivative conference file; and save the item file to an item file database, the item file further comprising a link to the package file saved on the package file database, wherein the document file is comprised by the package file as a discrete file in the original file type without conversion of the document (Par [0024-0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Udezue into the teaching of Guo in order to improve computer system (Par [0002]).
Udezue discloses a document file shared during the video conference. Guo and Udzue do not explicitly disclose a document file shared in an original file type during the video conference.
However, Mackell discloses a document file shared during the video conference (Par [0015, 0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Mackell into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezue in order to maintain an accuracy (Par [0014]).
As per claim 12, Guo discloses the computer system of claim 11 wherein the audio recording file and the video recording file of the video conference are received as a single file (Par [0047]).
As per claim 15, Guo discloses the computer system of claim 11 wherein the derivative conference file is at least one of visually displayed on a display of the user device and audibly played on an audio device of the user device (Par [0035-0036]).
As per claim 16, Udezue discloses the computer system of claim 11 wherein: the processor is further operable to process the package file to generate a plurality of derivative conference files; the item file comprises two or more derivative conference files of the plurality of derivative conference files, the item file comprising a transcript and another derivative conference file other than the transcript, defining a second derivative conference file; the transcript comprises an indication of when during the video conference the content giving rise to the second derivative conference file occurred; and each of the transcript and the second derivative conference are represented on the user device (Par [0024, 0041]).
As per claim 17, Udezue discloses the computer system of claim 11 wherein the derivative conference file is at least one of a transcript of the audio recording file, a task, an action item, a calendar event, and an annotation (Par [0024]).
As per claim 20, Udezue discloses the computer system of claim 11 wherein: the derivative conference file is one of a task, an action item, a calendar event, and an annotation; and the derivative conference file further comprises metadata comprising a link to a user record stored on a user record database (Par [0024-0025]).
As per claim 21, Guo discloses a system for facilitating collaboration utilizing video conferencing comprising:
means for receiving a plurality of conference files related to a video conference, the plurality of conference files comprising: an audio recording file of at least a portion of the video conference (Par [0016-0017, 0047, 0067]);
a video recording file of at least a portion of the video conference (Par [0039-0040]); and
means for generating a package file comprising the plurality of conference files; saving the package file to a package file database (par [0047]);
means for processing the package file to generate a derivative conference file (par 0047, 0050]).
Guo does not explicitly disclose means for generating an item file comprising the derivative conference file; and means for saving the item file to an item file database, the item file further comprising a link to the package file saved on the package file database, wherein the document file is comprised by the package file as a discrete file in the original file type without conversion of the document.
However, Udezue discloses means for generating an item file comprising the derivative conference file; and means for saving the item file to an item file database, the item file further comprising a link to the package file saved on the package file database, wherein the document file is comprised by the package file as a discrete file in the original file type without conversion of the document (Par [0024-0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Udezue into the teaching of Guo in order to improve computer system (Par [0002]).
Udezue discloses a document file shared during the video conference. Gou and Udzue do not explicitly disclose a document file shared in an original file type during the video conference.
However, Mackell discloses a document file shared during the video conference (Par [0015, 0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Mackell into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezue in order to maintain an accuracy (Par [0014]).
Claim(s) 3, 6, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al (U.S. Pub No. 2014/0118471 A1), and Udezue et al (U.S. Pub No. 2019/0073640), and Mackell et al (U.S. Pub No. 2020/0344278 A1), and further in view of Nakamura et al (U.S. Pub No. 2020/0112440 A1).
As per claim 3, Guo, Udezue and Mackell do not explicitly disclose the method of claim 1 further comprising: hashing the package file, generating a package file hash value; and one of recording the package file hash value to a smart contract deployed on a blockchain network and recording the package file hash value as extra data on a transaction sent to the blockchain network.
However, Nakamura discloses hashing the package file, generating a package file hash value; and one of recording the package file hash value to a smart contract deployed on a blockchain network and recording the package file hash value as extra data on a transaction sent to the blockchain network (par [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Nakamura into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezua and Mackell in order to protect data (par [0034]).
As per claim 6, Nakamura discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising: hashing the item file, generating an item file hash value; and one of recording the item file hash value to a smart contract deployed on a blockchain network and recording the item file hash value as extra data on a transaction sent to the blockchain network (par [0070]).
As per claim 13, Guo, Udezue and Mackell do not explicitly disclose the computer system of claim 11 wherein: the software, when executed by the processor, is further operable to: hash the package file, generating a package file hash value; and one of record the package file hash value to a smart contract that is deployable on a blockchain network and record the package file hash value as extra data on a blockchain network transaction; and the network communication device is further operable to one of transmit the smart contract for deployment on the blockchain network and transmit the transaction to the blockchain network.
However, Nakamura discloses the software, when executed by the processor, is further operable to: hash the package file, generating a package file hash value; and one of record the package file hash value to a smart contract that is deployable on a blockchain network and record the package file hash value as extra data on a blockchain network transaction; and the network communication device is further operable to one of transmit the smart contract for deployment on the blockchain network and transmit the transaction to the blockchain network (Par [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Nakamura into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezua and Mackell in order to protect data (par [0034]).
As per claim 19, Guo, Udezue and Mackell do not explicitly disclose the computer system of claim 11 wherein:
the processor is further operable to: hash the item file, generating an item file hash value; and
one of record the item file hash value to a smart contract that is deployable on a blockchain network and record the item file hash value as extra data on a blockchain network transaction; and the network communication device is further operable to one of transmit the smart contract for deployment on the blockchain network and transmit the transaction to the blockchain network.
However, Nakamura discloses the processor is further operable to: hash the item file, generating an item file hash value; and one of record the item file hash value to a smart contract that is deployable on a blockchain network and record the item file hash value as extra data on a blockchain network transaction; and the network communication device is further operable to one of transmit the smart contract for deployment on the blockchain network and transmit the transaction to the blockchain network (Par [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Nakamura into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezua and Mackell in order to protect data (par [0034]).
Claim(s) 5 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al (U.S. Pub No. 2014/0118471 A1), and Udezue et al (U.S. Pub No. 2019/0073640), and Mackell et al (U.S. Pub No. 2020/0344278 A1), and further in view of Xu (U.S. Pub No. 2011/0231382 A1).
As per claim 5, Guo discloses the method of claim 1 wherein: the document file is a document saved to a document database (Par [0062]).
Guo, Udezue and Mackell do not explicitly disclose the derivative conference file is an annotation associated with the document file; and the annotation is saved to a metadata database comprising metadata associated with documents stored on the document database.
However, Xu discloses the derivative conference file is an annotation associated with the document file; and the annotation is saved to a metadata database comprising metadata associated with documents stored on the document database (par [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Xu into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezua and Mackell in order to identify and quantity the significant of entities (Par [0002]).
As per claim 18, Guo discloses the computer system of claim 11 wherein: the document file is a document saved to a document database (Par [0062]).
Guo, Udezue and Mackell do not explicitly disclose the derivative conference file is an annotation associated with the document file; and the annotation is saved to a metadata database comprising metadata associated with documents stored on the document database.
However, Xu discloses the derivative conference file is an annotation associated with the document file; and the annotation is saved to a metadata database comprising metadata associated with documents stored on the document database (par [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Xu into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezua and Mackell in order to identify and quantity the significant of entities (Par [0002]).
Claim(s) 8-10 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al (U.S. Pub No. 2014/0118471 A1), and Udezue et al (U.S. Pub No. 2019/0073640), and Mackell et al (U.S. Pub No. 2020/0344278 A1), and further in view of Rust (U.S. Patent No. 7,908,321).
As per claim 8, Udezue discloses the method of claim 1 wherein: the item file comprises a timestamp indicating a time in at least one of the audio recording file and the video recording file with which the item file is associated, defining a related item time; and the method further comprises (par [0022]).
Guo, Udezue and Mackell do not explicitly disclose receiving a replay request from a user device, the replay request comprising a link to the package file; transmitting at least one of the audio recording file and the video recording file for playback on the user device; and transmitting the item file to the user device such that the derivative conference file is represented on the user device at the related item time.
However, Rust discloses receiving a replay request from a user device, the replay request comprising a link to the package file; transmitting at least one of the audio recording file and the video recording file for playback on the user device; and transmitting the item file to the user device such that the derivative conference file is represented on the user device at the related item time (Col 6 lines 37-61, and claims 2, 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Rust into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezua and Mackell in order to provide easy to use and cost effective (Col 2 lines 62-63).
As per claim 9, Guo discloses the method of claim 8 wherein the derivative conference file is at least one of visually displayed on a display of the user device and audibly played on an audio device of the user device (Par [0035-0036]).
As per claim 10, Udezue discloses the method of claim 8 wherein: processing the package file generates a plurality of derivative conference file; the item file comprises two or more derivative conference files of the plurality of derivative conference files, the item file comprising a transcript and another derivative conference file other than the transcript, defining a second derivative conference file; the transcript comprises an indication of when during the video conference the content giving rise to the second derivative conference file occurred; and each of the transcript and the second derivative conference are represented on the user device (Par [0024, 0041]).
As per claim 14, Udezue discloses the computer system of claim 11 wherein: the item file comprises a timestamp indicating a time in at least one of the audio recording file and the video recording file with which the item file is associated, defining a related item time; and the network communication device is further operable to (Par [0022]):
Guo, Udezue and Mackell do not explicitly disclose receive a replay request from a user device, the replay request comprising a link to the package file; transmit at least one of the audio recording file and the video recording file for playback on the user device; and transmit the item file to the user device such that the derivative conference file is represented on the user device at the related item time.
However, Rust discloses receive a replay request from a user device, the replay request comprising a link to the package file; transmit at least one of the audio recording file and the video recording file for playback on the user device; and transmit the item file to the user device such that the derivative conference file is represented on the user device at the related item time (Col 6 lines 37-61, and claims 2, 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the feature as disclosed in Rust into the teaching of Guo as modified by Udezua and Mackell in order to provide easy to use and cost effective (Col 2 lines 62-63).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THU N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Boris Gorney can be reached at 571-270-5626. 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.
September 18, 2026
/THU N NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2154
Prosecution Insights