DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to communication filed on 8/21/2025.
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 11, 13-17, 20 are subject to examination. Claims 4-5, 10, 12, 18-19 are cancelled.
This amendment and applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and entered by the Examiner.
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 1-3, 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forman et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0205778 (hereinafter Forman) in view of Malhotra et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2017/0142496 (hereinafter Malhotra) further in view of Jacobs et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2004/0172478 (hereinafter Jacobs) further in view of Loheide et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2019/0141394 (hereinafter Loheida)
With respect to claim 1, Forman teaches a method comprising:
-determining, during playback of a content stream encoded at a first bitrate and based on one or more network conditions, an opportunity to shift from the first bitrate to a second bitrate (Paragraph 25)
-determining, based on the opportunity, an encoded location in the content stream that identifies a switch point, wherein the switch point is associated with a low action point in a scene within the content stream (i.e. basketball game transitions to a commercial) wherein the opportunity is associated with a time duration to perform a bitrate switch (Paragraph 25); buffering the content stream (Paragraph 21)
Forman does not explicitly teach buffering, based on the switch point, the content stream encoded at the second bitrate; and switching, from the first bitrate to the second bitrate, at the switch point to cause playback of the buffered content stream encoded at the second bitrate.
Malhotra teaches buffering, based on the switch point, the content stream encoded at the second bitrate (i.e. temporarily store ad content in the buffer which is encoded using lower bit rate) (Paragraph 14) and switching, from the first bitrate to the second bitrate, at the switch point to cause playback of the buffered content stream encoded at the second bitrate (i.e. download rate of the ad content channel may be faster than the rate required for live program or streaming real-time & also the advertisement may be encoded using a lower bit rate than what is used for media content) (Paragraph 14, 33, 41-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Malhotra’s teaching in Forman’s teaching to come up with buffering the content stream at the second bitrate and switching from first bitrate to the second bit rate. The motivation for doing so would be advertisement has a faster download rate, therefore quality of the video can be lowered hence encoded at the lower bit rate compare to the live stream video or channel.
Although Forman teaches wherein switch point is associated with a low action point in a scene (i.e. basketball game transitions to commercial) within the content stream (Paragraph 25), but Jacobs explicitly teaches identifying a switch point wherein switch point is associated with a low action point (i.e. scene change) in a scene within the content stream (i.e. switch to higher bit rate when the change of scene occurs), wherein the opportunity is associated with a time duration to perform a bitrate switch (i.e. server may attempt to wait for a specified period to see if a scene change occurs during this interval) (Paragraph 36-38). Examiner would like to point out that according to the specification of the current application, in paragraph 2, it states that low action point can be scene change. Jacobs further teaches buffer, based on the switch point, the content stream encoded at the second bitrate (i.e. buffering up to size of 10 seconds) (Paragraph 36-38); witching, from the first bitrate to the second bitrate, at the switch point to cause playback of the buffered content stream encoded at the second bitrate (i.e. after say 10 seconds of filling up the buffer at this rate, the client will have a buffer of 10 seconds at which point it can decide to receive the higher bitrate stream from the server) (Paragraph 36, 38) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Jacobs’s teaching in Forman and Malhotra’s teaching to come up with having a switch point associated with low action point within the content stream. The motivation for doing so would be to switch one bit rate to another bitrate without any delay or lag or disruption.
Forman, Malhotra and Jacobs teaches determining location in the content stream that corresponds to a switch point, but does not explicitly state tag inserted at a location in the content stream that identifies a switch point.
Loheide teaches determining based on the opportunity, a tag inserted at a location in the content stream that corresponds a switch point (Paragraph 69, 82, 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Loheide’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra and Jacobs’s teaching to come up with having a tag inserted at a location in the content stream that corresponds a switch point. The motivation for doing so would be to use the switch points, to insert an ad break tag in the disparate live media output stream manifest and stitch in the first pre-encoded slate content segments for the scheduled duration of the ad break as defined by the programming schedule.
With respect to claim 2, Forman, Malhotra, Jacobs and Loheide teaches the method of claim 1, but Forman further teaches wherein the one or more network conditions comprise at least one of; a change to network bandwidth (Paragraph 23, 28-29), a change to a channel being played back, a selection of a time shifting operation, or an amount of content stream that has been buffered.
With respect to claim 3, Forman, Malhotra, Jacobs and Loheide teaches the method of claim 1, but Forman further teaches wherein the low action point indicates a point within the scene with a low quantity of movement (i.e. cartoon transition) (Paragraph 25)
With respect to claim 15, Forman teaches a method comprising:
-sending to a computing device, a first variant of a content stream encoded at a first bitrate (i.e. live NBA game playback from a video streaming service and a time range at 5000kbps to 10,000kbps)(Paragraph 21);
-receiving, from the computing device, a request for a second variant of the content stream (Paragraph 28), wherein the request is based on determining an encoded location in the content stream that identifies a switch point after determining an opportunity to shift from the first variant to the second variant (i.e. from 5000kbps to 10,000kbps) (Paragraph 22-23, 25); wherein the second variant is encoded at a second bit rate, and wherein the switch point is associated with a low action point in a scene within the content stream (i.e. basketball game transitions to a commercial), and wherein the opportunity is associated with a time duration to perform a bitrate switch (i.e. when streaming at certain time period i.e. 5pm EST )(Paragraph 22-23, 25);
Forman does not explicitly teach sending, based on the request, the second variant to cause playback of the content stream encoded at the second bitrate.
Malhotra teaches sending, based on the request, the second variant to cause playback of the content stream encoded at the second bitrate (i.e. download rate of the ad content channel may be faster than the rate required for live program or streaming real-time & also the advertisement may be encoded using a lower bit rate than what is used for media content) (Paragraph 14, 33, 41-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Malhotra’s teaching in Forman’s teaching to come up with sending the second variant to cause playback of the content stream encoded at the second bitrate. The motivation for doing so would be advertisement has a faster download rate, therefore quality of the video can be lowered hence encoded at the lower bit rate compare to the live stream video or channel.
Although Forman teaches wherein switch point is associated with a low action point in a scene (i.e. basketball game transitions to commercial) within the content stream (Paragraph 25), but Jacobs explicitly teaches identifying a switch point wherein switch point is associated with a low action point (i.e. scene change) in a scene within the content stream (i.e. switch to higher bit rate when the change of scene occurs), wherein the opportunity is associated with a time duration to perform a bitrate switch (i.e. server may attempt to wait for a specified period to see if a scene change occurs during this interval) (Paragraph 36-38). Examiner would like to point out that according to the specification of the current application, in paragraph 2, it states that low action point can be scene change. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Jacobs’s teaching in Forman and Malhotra’s teaching to come up with having a switch point associated with low action point within the content stream. The motivation for doing so would be to switch one bit rate to another bitrate without any delay or lag or disruption.
Forman, Malhotra and Jacobs teaches determining location in the content stream that corresponds to a switch point, but does not explicitly state tag inserted at a location in the content stream that identifies a switch point.
Loheide teaches determining based on the opportunity, a tag inserted at a location in the content stream that corresponds a switch point (Paragraph 69, 82, 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Loheide’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra and Jacobs’s teaching to come up with having a tag inserted at a location in the content stream that corresponds a switch point. The motivation for doing so would be to use the switch points, to insert an ad break tag in the disparate live media output stream manifest and stitch in the first pre-encoded slate content segments for the scheduled duration of the ad break as defined by the programming schedule.
With respect to claim 16-17, respectively, teaches same limitations as claims 2-3, respectively, therefore rejected under same basis.
Claim 8-9, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forman et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0205778 (hereinafter Forman) in view of Malhotra et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2017/0142496 (hereinafter Malhotra) further in view of Edpalm et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2019/0116371 (hereinafter Edpalm) further in view Loheide et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2019/0141394 (hereinafter Loheide)
With respect to claim 8, Forman teaches a method comprising:
-determining, during playback of a first variant of a content stream encoded at a first bitrate (i.e. live NBA game playback from a video streaming service and a time range at 5000kbps to 10,000kbps)(Paragraph 21) and based on one or more network conditions (i.e. based on bandwidth)(Paragraph 21), an opportunity to shift from the first variant to a second variant of the content stream encoded at a second bitrate (i.e. from 5000kbps to 10,000kbps), and wherein the opportunity is associated with a time duration to perform a bitrate switch (i.e. when streaming at certain time period i.e. 5pm EST )(Paragraph 22-23, 25);
-monitoring, based on the opportunity, the first variant for location in the content stream that identifies a switch point, wherein the switch point is associated with a dark point in a scene within the content stream (i.e. basketball game transitions to a commercial) wherein the opportunity is associated with a time duration to perform a bitrate switch (Paragraph 25)
-sending, based on determining the switch point, a request for the second variant (i.e. sending request based upon change in bandwidth)(Paragraph 28);
-receiving , based on the request the second variant (Paragraph 28); and
Forman does not explicitly teach switching from the first variant to the second variant at the switch point to cause playback of the received content stream encoded at the second bitrate.
Malhotra teaches buffering, based on the switch point, the content stream encoded at the second bitrate (i.e. temporarily store ad content in the buffer which is encoded using lower bit rate) (Paragraph 14) and switching from the first variant to the second variant at the switch point to cause playback of the received content stream encoded at the second bitrate (i.e. download rate of the ad content channel may be faster than the rate required for live program or streaming real-time & also the advertisement may be encoded using a lower bit rate than what is used for media content) (Paragraph 14, 33, 41-42). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Malhotra’s teaching in Forman’s teaching to come up with buffering the content stream at the second bitrate and switching from first bitrate to the second bit rate. The motivation for doing so would be advertisement has a faster download rate, therefore quality of the video can be lowered hence encoded at the lower bit rate compare to the live stream video or channel.
Forman does not explicitly teach dark point in a scene within the content stream.
Edpalm explicitly teaches switch point is associated with dark point (i.e. dim coloring) in a scene within the content stream (Paragraph 71). Examiner would like to point out that according to the specification of the current application, in paragraph 2, it states that dark point can be dim coloring. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Edpalms’s teaching in Forman and Malhotra’s teaching to come up with dark point indicating a point within the scene with dim coloring. The motivation for doing so would be dark conditions comprises much noise, lowering the quality of the video stream and thus making a lower first resolution advantageous.
Forman, Malhotra and Edpalm teaches monitoring, based on the opportunity, the first variant for an location in the content stream that identifies a switch point, but does not explicitly state tag inserted at a location in the content stream that identifies a switch point.
Loheide teaches determining based on the opportunity, a tag inserted at a location in the content stream that corresponds a switch point (Paragraph 69, 82, 124). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Loheide’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra and Edpalm’s teaching to come up with having a tag inserted at a location in the content stream that corresponds a switch point. The motivation for doing so would be to use the switch points, to insert an ad break tag in the disparate live media output stream manifest and stitch in the first pre-encoded slate content segments for the scheduled duration of the ad break as defined by the programming schedule.
With respect to claim 9, Forman, Malhotra, Edpalm and Loheide teaches the method of claim 1, but Forman further teaches wherein the one or more network conditions comprise at least one of; a change to network bandwidth (Paragraph 23, 28-29), a change to a channel being played back, a selection of a time shifting operation, or an amount of content stream that has been buffered.
With respect to claim 11, Forman, Malhotra, Edpalm and Loheide teaches the method of claim 8, but Edpalm further teaches wherein the dark point indicates a point within the scene with dim coloring (Paragraph 71). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Edpalm’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra and Loheide’s teaching to come up with having dark point indicating a point within the scene with dim coloring. The motivation for doing so would be dark conditions comprises much noise, lowering the quality of the video stream and thus making a lower first resolution advantageous.
Claims 6-7, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forman et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0205778 (hereinafter Forman) in view of Malhotra et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2017/0142496 (hereinafter Malhotra) further in view of Jacobs further in view of Loheide further in view further in view of Loheide et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0343495 (hereinafter Loheide2)
With respect to claim 6, Forman, Malhotra, Jacobs and Loheide teaches the method of claim 1, but fails to further teaches wherein the metadata comprises at least one of: an in-band tag, wherein the in-band tag comprises ID3 tag or an out-of-band tag, wherein the out-of-band tag comprises an HTTP live streamlining (HLS) tag or a dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH) event.
Loehide2 teaches wherein the metadata comprises at least one of: an in-band tag, wherein the in-band tag comprises ID3 tag (Paragraph 80) or an out-of-band tag, wherein the out-of-band tag comprises an HTTP live streamlining (HLS) tag or a dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH) event (Paragraph 50). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Loehide2’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra, Jacobs and Loheide’s teaching to come up with having tag comprising an in-band tag comprising ID3 tag. The motivation for doing so would be to provide event trigger by providing detectable identifiers such as ID3 tags.
With respect to claim 7, Forman, Malhotra, Jacobs and Loheide teaches the method of claim 1, but fails to further teaches further comprising: causing display of one or more messages, wherein the one or more messages comprises at least one of: an alert, a notification or a reminder.
Loheide2 teaches causing display of one or more messages, wherein the one or more messages comprises at least one of: an alert, a notification or a reminder (Paragraph 140). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Leohide2’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra, Jacobs and Loheide’s teaching to come up with causing display of one or more message comprising a notification. The motivation for doing so would be to provide notification based on the selection of one of the overlaid interactive items and the one or more user-selectable options in the list.
With respect to claim 20, they recite similar limitations as claim 7, therefore rejected under same basis.
Claims 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forman et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0205778 (hereinafter Forman) in view of Malhotra et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2017/0142496 (hereinafter Malhotra) further in view of Edpalm further view of Loheide further in view of Loheide et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0343495 (hereinafter Loheide2)
With respect to claim 13, Forman, Malhotra, Edpalm and Loheide teaches the method of claim 8, but fails to further teaches wherein the metadata comprises at least one of: an in-band tag, wherein the in-band tag comprises ID3 tag or an out-of-band tag, wherein the out-of-band tag comprises an HTTP live streamlining (HLS) tag or a dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH) event.
Loheide2 teaches wherein the metadata comprises at least one of: an in-band tag, wherein the in-band tag comprises ID3 tag (Paragraph 80) or an out-of-band tag, wherein the out-of-band tag comprises an HTTP live streamlining (HLS) tag or a dynamic adaptive streaming over HTTP (DASH) event (Paragraph 50). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Loheide2’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra, Edpalm and Loheide’s teaching to come up with having tag comprising an in-band tag comprising ID3 tag. The motivation for doing so would be to provide event trigger by providing detectable identifiers such as ID3 tags.
With respect to claim 14, Forman, Malhotra, Edpalm and Loheide teaches the method of claim 8, but fails to further teaches further comprising: causing display of one or more messages, wherein the one or more messages comprises at least one of: an alert, a notification or a reminder.
Loheide2 teaches causing display of one or more messages, wherein the one or more messages comprises at least one of: an alert, a notification or a reminder (Paragraph 140). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Loheide2’s teaching in Forman, Malhotra, Edpalm and Loheide’s teaching to come up with causing display of one or more message comprising a notification. The motivation for doing so would be to provide notification based on the selection of one of the overlaid interactive items and the one or more user-selectable options in the list.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to Waggoner reference on 3/3/2026 have been fully considered but deemed moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A). Philllips et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2017/0374116 which in Paragraph 39 teaches ABR streaming techniques allow for streaming of content encoded at varying bitrates depending on network bandwidth conditions, client resources and radio signal quality.
B). Ramaley et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2017/0280181 which in Paragraph 39 teaches user device may seek the content in lower or high bitrate to accommodate changing network conditions.
C). Reynolds et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2015/0229694 which in Paragraph 23 teaches placing advertisement for a cheese burger from a specific fast food chain based on ABR technology to receive streaming video from streaming server near clients location.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHAIRYA A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5809. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30am-4:00pm.
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, Kamal B Divecha can be reached on 571-272-5863. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
DHAIRYA A. PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2453
/DHAIRYA A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453