DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This action is in response to amendment filed on 7/23/2026, in which claims 21, 24, 31, 35, and 41 – 42 was amended and claims 21 – 24, 26 – 38, and 40 - 42 was presented for further examination.
3. Claims 21 – 24, 26 – 38, and 40 - 42 are now pending in the application.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
4. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/23/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 21 – 24, 26 – 38, and 40 - 42 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Remarks
6. Applicant argues in substance in pages 8 – 10 that Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1), West et al (US 2011/0239253 A1), and Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) does not disclose generating, from the plurality of users, a cluster of users associated with both (a) a particular group of genres of the plurality of genres and (b) a particular group of channels of the plurality of channels based on determining that, the media content viewing history, comprises both: indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items of at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres within the specified time range, and indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items from at least one respective channel of the particular group of channels within the specified time range.
In response to applicants’ argument, Examiner respectfully responds that the combine teaching of that Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1), Oddo (US 2007/0169148 A1), West et al (US 2011/0239253 A1), and Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) Specifically disclose generating, from the plurality of users, a cluster of users associated with both (a) a particular group of genres of the plurality of genres and (b) a particular group of channels of the plurality of channels based on determining that, the media content viewing history, comprises both: indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items of at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres within the specified time range, and indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items from at least one respective channel of the particular group of channels within the specified time range (para.[0124], para.[0135], and para.[0154]).
Oddo discloses the process of displaying recommendation content to television viewer (see abstract). A user or multi-user profiles data and rates are generated base on their viewing habit or history which includes users’ types of affinities and time of day access (see para.[0039]). For different time of day, a user may have genre affinities or/and station affinities (see para.[0085] and para.[0102]). A duration of view for channel and genre can be kept separately so that both information will not dilute each other (see para.[0112]). The information for the total hours views can also be kept. The profiling data can be combined with rating data using a clustering algorithm to generate a recommendation for the user (see para.[0123] – para.[0124]). The genre score and station score for particular time of the day can be matched to determine the favorite and applying clustering algorithm on the match data to generate a recommendation (see para.[0135]). The group monitor engine record and provides an indicator if it detects users in same group watching same program. (see para.[0154]).
As per claims 41 and 42, composite label automatically includes content from both sources. In the instance of the current claim limitation, composite label will automatically include content from genres and channel.
Thus, the rejection is maintained.
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.
7. Claims 21 – 23, 26 – 27, 30 – 37, and 40 – 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1), in view of Oddo et al (US 2007/0169148 A1), in view of West et al (US 2011/0239253 A1), and in view of Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1).
As per claim 21, Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1) discloses,
A method comprising: identifying, by a server, media content viewing history of a plurality of users over a specified time range (para.0062]; “collect viewing history information from each user group” and para.[0123]; “listening history of each user at intervals of a preset period ( e.g. daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, or the like)”).
wherein the media content viewing history comprises a plurality of genres and a plurality of channels accessed by the plurality of users within the specified time range (para.[0062]; “collected viewing history information may include channel information for each user group 200 and information about pieces of content viewed on each channel”, where content information view on each channel is interpreted as genre as claimed and para.[0092]; “viewing history information 20, which is obtained for a preset period ( e.g. a week, a month, a quarter, or a year), may be collected from a specific user group (e.g. household #1). Here, the collected viewing history information 20 may include information about viewing channels, viewing times”).
comprises both: indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items of at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres within the specified time range (NOTE: para.[0062]; “collect viewing history information from each user group 200. Here, the collected viewing history information
may include channel information for each user group 200 and information about pieces of content viewed on each channel” and para.[0095]; “the collected viewing history information 20 for each user group into viewing history information for each channel group generated by the channel group generation”)
and indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items from at least one respective channel of the particular group of channels within the specified time range (NOTE: para.[0062]; “collect viewing history information from each user group 200. Here, the collected viewing history information may include channel information for each user group 200 and information about pieces of content viewed on each channel” and para.[0095]; “the collected viewing history information 20 for each user group into viewing history information for each channel group generated by the channel group generation”)
Kim does not specifically disclose generating, from the plurality of users, a cluster of users associated with both (a) a particular group of genres of the plurality of genres and (b) a particular group of channels of the plurality of channels based on determining that, the media content viewing history.
However, Oddo et al (US 2007/0169148 A1) in an analogous art discloses,
generating, from the plurality of users, a cluster of users associated with both (a) a particular group of genres of the plurality of genres and (b) a particular group of channels of the plurality of channels based on determining that, the media content viewing history (para.[0124]; “using clustering methods described in the ratings section below in order to recommend programs on stations that the user has never viewed but that are similar to the user's preferred stations” and para.[0135]; “user or household can be determined by multiplying the Genre score and Station score in the user profile that matches the genre and station of the program for the appropriate day part ….. ……the favorite programs, stage the program must match both the station affinity and genre affinity of the user for the current day part”).
comprises both: indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items of at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres within the specified time range (para.[0154]; “a plurality of the user's group members is viewing the same program, an indicator engine 955 generates an indicator via an interactive process 957 based on the group information available from the group monitoring engine”).
and indications that each user of the cluster of users has accessed media content items from at least one respective channel of the particular group of channels within the specified time range (para.[0154]; “a plurality of the user's group members is viewing the same program, an indicator engine 955 generates an indicator via an interactive process 957 based on the group information available from the group monitoring engine”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate content recommendation system of Oddo into tracking of viewing history of Kim to notifying a user of various content items based on user profile information or selected group viewing and providing real time, personalized recommendations to users.
Neither Kim nor Oddo specifically disclose creating a composite text label for the cluster of users comprising: an indication the particular group of genres; and an indication of the particular group of channels; storing the composite text label in association with the cluster of users.
However, West et al (US 2011/0239253 A1) in an analogous art discloses,
creating a composite text label for the cluster of users (para.[0080]; “ create composite audio-video clips. The composites may be from a single program, or from multiple programs that share one or more common traits, or that are "favorites" of a particular user or group of users” and para.[0093]; “user may assign the composite channel a custom channel number (regardless of the content sources used to create the composite content) and/or a custom position within a channel lineup in an electronic program guide”).
wherein the composite text label comprises both a first textual indication of the particular group of genres (para.[0091]; “generating a user-defined composite channel that includes content from various television providers and other sources …. the user accesses an appropriate menu or wizard for creating the composite channel” and para.[0092]; “user makes selections for the new composite channel. This may involve selecting channels, programs, genres of content, content descriptors (e.g., to be compared against tags or other metadata), etc”, and para.[0093]; “user may assign the composite channel a custom channel number (regardless of the content sources used to create the composite content) and/or a custom position within a channel lineup in an electronic program guide”).
and a second textual indication of the particular group of channels, wherein the second textual indication is distinct from the first textual indication (para.[0091]; “generating a user-defined composite channel that includes content from various television providers and other sources …. the user accesses an appropriate menu or wizard for creating the composite channel” and para.[0092]; “user makes selections for the new composite channel. This may involve selecting channels, programs, genres of content, content descriptors (e.g., to be compared against tags or other metadata), etc”, and para.[0093]; “user may assign the composite channel a custom channel number (regardless of the content sources used to create the composite content) and/or a custom position within a channel lineup in an electronic program guide”).
storing the composite text label in association with the cluster of users (para.[0093]; “new composite channel (although this may be done prior to or during the content selection process) and saves his/her selections. This record may be saved to the set-top box and/or server”).
and displaying on a graphical user interface generated for presentation to a user (Fig.5, para.[0015]; “on-screen channel guide for an Internet-based television content delivery system”, para.[0041]; “users may be provided the ability to designate custom channel groups. These may be channels having similar content (sports, news, etc.) or may correspond to some other user-desired grouping”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West into content recommendation system of Oddo to deliver content or made content available in a custom viewing schedule of the system of Kim.
Neither Kim nor Oddo nor West specifically disclose the composite text label with a visual representation of the cluster of users.
However, Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) in an analogous art discloses,
storing the composite text label in association with the cluster of users (NOTE: para.[0032]; “Data store 150 may include any combination of subscription data 155 and channel data” and para.[0033]; “etc.). For a composite channel, channel data 160 may also include identifiers of one or more component channels associated with the composite channel. The channel data 160 may also include data indicative of an interest of a user in a channel ……. The data indicative …….. information about others users who are similar to the user”).
the composite text label with a visual representation of the cluster of users (para.[0054]; “composite channel may include a set of channels that other users who
have subscribed to the component channel also watch”, para.[0085]; “GUI contain a search tool ( e.g., to search for a channel or media item of interest), an upload tool ( e.g., to upload a new media item to a content platform), a menu (e.g., to navigate to different GUis of the content platform), a user identifier”, para.[0086]; “user home GUI 500 can include a user feed”, and para.[0088]; “The information of activities of others (e.g., channels, social contacts, celebrities, etc.) can be presented as one or more user feed items 510A-510N. The user feed items 510A-510N can include an activity message, a thumbnail”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate channel recommendation of the system of Lewis into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and content recommendation system of Oddo to identify a compact means of accessing user program viewing history by channel in order to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to quickly identify relevant clusters of media content.
As per claim 22, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated and further Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1) discloses,,
further comprising pattern mining, by the server, to identify a pattern of frequently accessed channels from the plurality of channels (para.[0002]; “analyze viewing history patterns of users for respective channel groups”).
As per claim 23, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated and further Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1) discloses,
further comprising pattern mining, by the server, to identify a pattern of frequently accessed genres from the plurality of genres (para.[0139]; “collect the sound source listening history information of the user from the system of a sound source provision site accessed by the user”).
As per claim 26, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, and further Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) discloses,
further comprising displaying on the graphical user interface generated for presentation to the user, from the plurality of users, advertising related to the particular group of genres (Fig.5)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate channel recommendation of the system of Lewis into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and content recommendation system of Oddo to identify a compact means of accessing user program viewing history by channel in order to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to quickly identify relevant clusters of media content.
As per claim 27, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, and further Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) discloses,
further comprising displaying on the graphical user interface generated for presentation to the user, from the plurality of users, advertising related to the composite text label (Fig.5)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate channel recommendation of the system of Lewis into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and content recommendation system of Oddo to identify a compact means of accessing user program viewing history by channel in order to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to quickly identify relevant clusters of media content.
As per claim 30, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, and further Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) discloses,
wherein the composite text label is used to track user engagement behavior (para.[0058]; “create a composite channel based on an activity of a user”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate channel recommendation of the system of Lewis into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and content recommendation system of Oddo to identify a compact means of accessing user program viewing history by channel in order to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to quickly identify relevant clusters of media content.
As per claim 41, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, and further Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) discloses,
wherein the creating the composite text label for the cluster of users comprises: concatenating the first textual indication of the particular group of genres and the second textual indication of the particular group of channels to generate the composite text label (para.[0022]; “composite channel is a channel that includes at least one individual ("component") channel along with additional content (e.g., another component channel) …….. the composite channel is a compilation of channels from multiple channel curators”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate channel recommendation of the system of Lewis into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and content recommendation system of Oddo to identify a compact means of accessing user program viewing history by channel in order to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to quickly identify relevant clusters of media content.
Claims 31, 32 – 33, 34, 40, and 42 are system claim corresponding to method claims 21, 26 – 27, and 23 respectively, and rejected under the same reason set forth in connection to the rejection of claims 21, 26 – 27, 23, 30, and 41 respectively above.
Claims 35 and 36 - 37 are non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim corresponding to method claims 21 and 28 - 30 respectively, and rejected under the same reason set forth in connection to the rejection of claims 21 and 28 - 30 respectively above.
8. Claims 24, 28 – 29, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1), in view of Oddo et al (US 2007/0169148 A1), in view of West et al (US 2011/0239253 Al), in view of Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1), and further view of Arling et al (US 2014/0047467 A1).
As per claim 24, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1), West et al (US 2011/0239253 Al), and Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) does not disclose determining a number of times a media device associated with a particular user from the cluster of users has accessed the media content items of at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres, wherein the media content items of the at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres are identified by media content identifiers.
However, Arling et al (US 2014/0047467 A1) in an analogous art discloses,
further comprising determining a number of times a media device associated with a particular user from the cluster of users has accessed the media content items of at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres, wherein the media content items of the at least one respective genre of the particular group of genres are identified by media content identifiers (claim 1; “providing an order to listings within the program channel guide as a function of the cumulative access times of each of the plurality of program channels of which access was captured as maintained within the program channel access history for the one or more of the plurality of users”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate optimization of content listing based on user viewing history of the system of Arling into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and channel recommendation of the system of Lewis in order to identify frequency of access of particular media content by users' devices in the system of Kim.
As per claim 28, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, Kim et al (US 2016/0142775 A1), West et al (US 2011/0239253 Al), and Lewis et al (US 2016/0323619 A1) does not disclose determining an average viewing history based on a number of times users of the cluster of users accessed any media content item; and selecting one or more sample users based on their viewing histories being similar to the average viewing history.
However, Arling et al (US 2014/0047467 A1) in an analogous art discloses,
further comprising: determining an average viewing history based on a number of times users of the cluster of users accessed any media content item; and selecting one or more sample users based on their viewing histories being similar to the average viewing history (fig.7 and para.[0040]; “Cumulative viewing time 710 for this user”; and claim 1; “cumulative access time of each of the plurality of channels of which access was captured as maintained within the program channel access history for the one or more of the plurality of users”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate optimization of content listing based on user viewing history of the system of Arling into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and channel recommendation of the system of Lewis in order to identify frequency of access of particular media content by users' devices in the system of Kim.
As per claim 29, the re rejection of claim 28 is incorporated, and further Arling et al (US 2014/0047467 A1) discloses,
wherein the creating the composite text label for the cluster of users is based on at least one of the one or more sample or the average viewing history (claim 1; “cumulative access time of each of the plurality of channels of which access was captured as maintained within the program channel access history for the one or more of the plurality of users”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was filed to incorporate optimization of content listing based on user viewing history of the system of Arling into the process of creating a composite channel of the system of West and program grouping by channel of the system of Walter to view content recorded in the viewing history of the system of Kim in order to identify population of user that access the content over a specific period of time.
Claims 38 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim corresponding to method claim 28, and rejected under the same reason set forth in connection to the rejection of claims 28 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
TITLE: Entertainment content rendering application, US 2012/0174158 A1 authors: Mowrey et al (see Fig.3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUGUSTINE KUNLE OBISESAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2020. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ajay Bhatia can be reached at (571) 272-3906. 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.
/AUGUSTINE K. OBISESAN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2156
9/19/2026
Prosecution Insights