DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Remarks
2. This Office action is responsive to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed under 37 CFR §1.53(d) for the instant application on March 26, 2026. Applicants have properly set forth the RCE, which has been entered into the application, and an examination on the merits follows herewith.
Claims 1-23 have been examined and rejected. This Office action is responsive to the amendment filed on March 26, 2026, which has been entered in the above identified application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. The corrections to claims 1, 20, and 21 have been approved, and the rejections to claims 1-22 are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-3, 5, 8, 11, 13, 15, and 18-21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344) in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160).
5-1. Regarding claims 1, 20, and 21, Nathanson teaches the claim comprising: at an electronic device in communication with one or more input devices: while the electronic device is in a communication session with a plurality of second electronic devices, wherein the communication session includes a phone call, video call, or videoconferencing session with the plurality of second electronic devices, the plurality of second electronic devices associated with a plurality of second users different from a user of the electronic device: while playback of a content item is occurring, receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to modify the playback of the content item, by disclosing an endpoint device in communication with one or more second endpoint devices via a communications server that hosts a video conferencing meeting between the endpoint devices [column 2, lines 50-62; column 3, lines 7-11; figure 1]. An invitation coordinator detects an initiation of a group music sharing session by a first participant of the web conferencing session and polls the remaining participants for inclusion into the group [column 6, lines 22-25; column 8, lines 16-24]. A group music sharing session is created that includes each participant that accepted the invitation [column 6, lines 25-34; column 8, lines 35-39], and a multimedia player transmits music and music information to participants of the group music sharing session to create a synchronized music listening experience on the participating endpoint devices [column 7, lines 1-4]. The multimedia player receives input from the group leader that allows the group leader to fast forward, rewind, and skip tracks [column 7, lines 5-7].
Nathanson teaches in response to receiving the input: in accordance with a determination that the input is received while the electronic device is in a first shared content playback mode of the communication session that includes playback of the content item at the electronic device and the plurality of second electronic devices, modifying the playback of the content item in accordance with the input at the electronic device and at the plurality of second electronic devices, by disclosing that a group music sharing session is created that includes each participant that accepted the invitation [column 6, lines 25-34; column 8, lines 35-39], and a multimedia player transmits music and music information to participants of the group music sharing session to create a synchronized music listening experience on the participating endpoint devices [column 7, lines 1-4]. The multimedia player receives input from the group leader that allows the group leader to fast forward, rewind, and skip tracks [column 7, lines 5-7]. Thus, if two or more second endpoint devices of the video conferencing meeting accept the invitation, the two or more second endpoint devices will be part of the group music sharing session where playback of music will be synchronized among the members of the group music sharing session.
Although Nathanson discloses that while a first user is in a web conferencing session with two or more second uses [column 3, lines 7-11], a group music sharing session can be created for certain participants who have accepted an invitation [column 8, lines 10-30] where a song may be played to the participants of the session [column 8, lines 56-58], Nathanson does not teach that multiple music sharing sessions may occur such that music will only be synchronized among the participants belonging to a particular session, thus making playback of music within a particular session private to users that do not belong to that particular session. That is, Nathanson does not expressly teach in accordance with a determination that the input is received while the electronic device is in a private content playback mode of the communication session that includes playback of the content item at the electronic device without including playback of the content item at the plurality of second electronic devices that are in a second shared content playback mode of the communication session that includes playback of a second content item at the plurality of second electronic devices, modifying the playback of the content item in accordance with the input at the electronic device without modifying the playback of the content item at the plurality of second electronic devices. Alsina discloses one or more client devices interconnected via a communication network to form a group [column 3, lines 25-28; column 4, lines 5-16; column 7, lines 22-55; figure 1] where group members may manipulate a playlist by adding an audio file such as a song to a queue for playback, pause the playback, fast forward or rewind a song, reorder the playlist, etc. [column 8, lines 11-14] and where manipulation of the playlist may be experienced by all of the other group members [column 8, lines 14-19]. Members of a group may split off from the remaining members of the group, such that the playlist and group settings may persist as two distinct groups that are synchronizing playback [column 11, lines 31-34]. Manipulations of the playlist may be performed separately for each group such that the playlist is synchronized only within the remaining members of the group [column 11, lines 34-37]. This would allow the preferences of more users to be met. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allow multiple music playback groups where playback of music is synchronized only with the members of the group, as taught by Alsina. This would allow the preferences of more users to be met. Thus, a first user in a first group may be considered in a private content playback mode from the perspective of two or more second users that are in a second group, where playback is synchronized only with members belonging to the group.
Nathanson-Alsina teach while the electronic device is in the private content playback mode of the communication session, being in communication with the plurality of second electronic devices in the communication session, by disclosing that that while in the video conferencing session, participants may communicate with each other [Nathanson, column 2, lines 33-44; column 3, lines 7-11]. A chatroom or group text may persist after a participating member leaves the group [Alsina, column 8, lines 31-37]. Thus, a communication session may still exist between members that belong to different groups.
5-2. Regarding claim 2, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising while the electronic device is in the communication session: receiving an indication of selection of a respective content item at a respective electronic device of the plurality of second electronic devices; and in response to receiving the indication of selection of the respective content item, initiating playback of the respective content item at the electronic device, by disclosing that a playlist coordinator receives input from the group leader selecting a song for simultaneous playback on all endpoint devices that are part of the group music sharing session [Nathanson, column 8, lines 56-58].
5-3. Regarding claim 3, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: while the electronic device is in the communication session: receiving, via the one or more input devices, an indication of a request to initiate playback of a respective content item in the communication session, by disclosing that a playlist coordinator receives input from the group leader selecting a song for simultaneous playback on all endpoint devices that are part of the group music sharing session [Nathanson, column 8, lines 56-58].
Nathanson-Alsina teach in response to receiving the indication of the request to initiate playback of the respective content item in the communication session: in accordance with a determination that a user account associated with the electronic device is entitled to access the respective content item through a content service associated with the communication session, presenting a selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to initiate playback of the respective content item in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session; and in accordance with a determination that the user account associated with the electronic device is not entitled to access the respective content item through the content service associated with the communication session, forgoing presenting the selectable option, by disclosing receiving a play command [Alsina, column 9, lines 42-46] and determining whether a member of the group is restricted from playing or accessing certain types of content [Alsina, column 11, lines 47-51]. Thus, if there are no restrictions, the user interface will proceed normally and the selected song will be played. If the group includes a minor or a member who is otherwise restricted from playing or accessing certain types of content (such as restricted tracks), those types of tracks may be skipped from the playlist [Alsina, column 11, lines 47-53]. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, for the group music sharing session of Nathanson, restrictions on certain users from accessing certain types of content, as taught by Alsina. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants.
5-4. Regarding claim 5, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: while the electronic device is in the communication session and while the electronic device is in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session: playing a respective content item from a shared content item queue of the communication session that includes a plurality of content items, wherein the electronic device and the plurality of second electronic devices are able to edit the shared content item queue, by disclosing that a playlist coordinator receives input from participants of the group music sharing session on which songs they would like to add to a master playlist [Nathanson, column 6, lines 47-67; column 8, lines 51-55]. The playlist coordinator receives input from the group leader selecting a song for simultaneous playback on all endpoint devices that are part of the group music sharing session [Nathanson, column 8, lines 56-58].
5-5. Regarding claim 8, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 5, further comprising: receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to change a playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue while the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue is a first playback order, and in response to receiving the input corresponding to the request to change the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue: in accordance with a determination that a respective one of the plurality of second electronic devices detected an input corresponding to a second request to change the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue from the first playback order prior to the electronic device receiving the input corresponding to the request to change the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue, updating the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue to be a second playback order according to the input detected at the respective one of the plurality of second electronic devices; and in accordance with a determination that the respective one of the plurality of second electronic devices did not detect an input corresponding to the second request to change the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue from the first playback order prior to the electronic device receiving the input corresponding to the request to change the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue, updating the playback order of the plurality of content items included in the shared content item queue to be a third playback order, different from the second playback order, according to the input detected at the electronic device, by disclosing that the participants and/or the group leader of the group music sharing session may modify the playlist [Nathanson, column 8, lines 51-55].
5-6. Regarding claim 11, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: while the electronic device is in the communication session and while the electronic device is in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session: in accordance with a determination that the communication session was initiated at a first respective electronic device associated with first content playback restrictions, restricting playback of one or more content items according to the first content playback restrictions; and in accordance with a determination that the communication session was initiated at a second respective electronic device associated with second content playback restrictions, restricting playback of the one or more content items according to the second content playback restrictions, by disclosing receiving a play command [Alsina, column 9, lines 42-46] and determining whether a member of the group is restricted from playing or accessing certain types of content [Alsina, column 11, lines 47-51]. Thus, if there are no restrictions, the user interface will proceed normally and the selected song will be played. If the group includes a minor or a member who is otherwise restricted from playing or accessing certain types of content (such as restricted tracks), those types of tracks may be skipped from the playlist [Alsina, column 11, lines 47-53]. Group members inherit the restrictions associated with a master device of the group [Alsina, column 11, lines 57-59]. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, for the group music sharing session of Nathanson, restrictions on certain users from accessing certain types of content, where such restrictions are associated with a master device of the group and inherited by members of the group, as taught by Alsina. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants.
5-7. Regarding claim 13, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: while the electronic device is in a respective communication session with one or more electronic devices, the one or more electronic devices associated with one or more users different from the user of the electronic device, receiving, via the one or more electronic devices, an indication of a request to initiate playback of a respective content item in the respective communication session, by disclosing that the group leader controls the music playback in the group music sharing session for all participants in the group [Nathanson, column 6, lines 32-34]. The first participant may transfer leadership (and control of music playback) permanently or temporarily to one or more of the remaining participants [Nathanson, column 6, lines 36-39].
Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach in response to receiving the indication of the request to initiate playback of the respective content item in the respective communication session: in accordance with a determination that a content playback restriction setting of the electronic device is not more restrictive than a content playback restriction setting associated with the respective communication session, displaying, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device, a selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to initiate playback of the respective content item in a shared content playback mode of the respective communication session; and in accordance with a determination that the content playback restriction setting of the electronic device is more restrictive than the content playback restriction setting associated with the respective communication session, forgoing display of the selectable option, by disclosing receiving a play command [Alsina, column 9, lines 42-46] and determining whether a member of the group is restricted from playing or accessing certain types of content [Alsina, column 11, lines 47-51]. Thus, if there are no restrictions, the user interface will proceed normally and the selected song will be played. If the group includes a minor or a member who is otherwise restricted from playing or accessing certain types of content (such as restricted tracks), those types of tracks may be skipped from the playlist [Alsina, column 11, lines 47-53]. Group members inherit the restrictions associated with a master device of the group [Alsina, column 11, lines 57-59]. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, for the group music sharing session of Nathanson, restrictions on certain users from accessing certain types of content, where such restrictions are associated with a master device of the group and inherited by members of the group, as taught by Alsina. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants
5-8. Regarding claim 15, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: while the electronic device is in the communication session and while the electronic device is in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session: receiving, from a respective one of the plurality of second electronic devices, an indication of a first input corresponding to a request to modify playback of the content item at the electronic device and the plurality of second electronic devices; and in response to receiving the indication of the first input: modifying playback of the content item at the electronic device in accordance with the first input, by disclosing that the group leader controls the music playback in the group music sharing session for all participants in the group [Nathanson, column 6, lines 32-34]. The first participant may transfer leadership (and control of music playback) permanently or temporarily to one or more of the remaining participants [Nathanson, column 6, lines 36-39].
Nathanson teaches displaying, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device, a visual indication of the first input, by disclosing that a media aggregator provides music information such as song information, artist information, artwork, and lyrics for the participants to view while a song is playing [Nathanson, column 6, lines 56-61] and a user interface coordinator displays the music information on one or more tabs of the user interface [Nathanson, column 7, lines 8-10]. Thus, music information of the song selected for play is displayed to indicate the group leader’s input to play the song.
5-9. Regarding claim 18, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: while the electronic device is associated with first content playback restrictions and while the electronic device is in the communication session, the communication session associated with second content playback restrictions: while the electronic device is not in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session, receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to enter the first shared content playback mode of the communication session; and in response to the input corresponding to the request to enter the first shared content playback mode of the communication session: in accordance with a determination that the first content playback restrictions are more restrictive than the second content playback restrictions, forgoing entering the first shared content playback mode of the communication session; and in accordance with a determination that the first content playback restrictions are not more restrictive than the second content playback restrictions, entering the first shared content playback mode of the communication session, by disclosing that group members have restrictions, and if an invitee who is a minor or otherwise cannot listen to at least some of the group content, the invitee is denied access to the group [Alsina, column 11, lines 47-55]. Thus, if there are no restrictions, the invitee will be made part of the group. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, for the group music sharing session of Nathanson, restrictions on certain users from accessing certain types of content, as taught by Alsina. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants.
5-10. Regarding claim 19, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1. Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach the claim further comprising: while the electronic device is associated with first content playback restrictions: while the electronic device is not in the communication session, the communication session associated with second content playback restrictions, receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to join the communication session; and in response to the input corresponding to the request to join the communication session: in accordance with a determination that the first content playback restrictions are more restrictive than the second content playback restrictions, forgoing joining the communication session; and in accordance with a determination that the first content playback restrictions are not more restrictive than the second content playback restrictions, joining the communication session, by disclosing that receiving a request for an individual to join a group may include authentication procedures such as access permissions (e.g., parental restrictions [Alsina, column 7, line 67 to column 8, line 4]. An invitee who is a minor or otherwise cannot listen to at least some of the group content may be denied access to the group [Alsina, column 11, lines 53-55]. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants of a group. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, for the video conferencing session of Nathanson, restrictions on certain users from joining the session, as taught by Alsina. This would ensure that appropriate or acceptable content is played for all participants.
5-11. Regarding claim 23, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising, while the electronic device is in the private content playback mode of the communication session, displaying, via the display generation component, a selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to transition to the first shared content playback mode, by disclosing that new participants may join a group music sharing session by responding to a received invitation from a current participant [Nathanson, column 9, lines 17-20, column 8, lines 31-34; Alsina, column 7, lines 27-29].
6. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344), in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160), and further in view of Chiu (Pub. No. US 2006/0056614).
6-1. Regarding claim 4, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1. Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach the claim further comprising: while the electronic device is in the communication session: receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to selection of a respective content item; and in response to receiving the input corresponding to selection of the respective content item, displaying, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device: a first selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to initiate playback of the respective content item in the first shared content playback mode on the electronic device and the plurality of second electronic devices; and a second selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to initiate playback of the respective content item in the private content playback mode on the electronic device without initiating playback of the respective content item on the plurality of second electronic devices. Chiu discloses that a participant of a teleconference is provided an option for media playback either in “public” or “private” form, wherein in the private form, playback is presented solely to the addressee and in the public form, playback is presented to all the participants of the teleconference [Chiu, paragraph 22]. This would provide an efficient way for the user to obtain added privacy when desired. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, during the group music sharing session of Nathanson-Alsina, an option for public or private playback of a selected content item, as taught by Chiul. This would provide an efficient way for the user to obtain added privacy when desired.
7. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344), in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160), and further in view of Rounds (Pub. No. US 2004/0064476), and further in view of.
7-1. Regarding claim 6, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 5. Although Nathanson-Alsina disclose that a user interface coordinator displays a playlist of songs in one or more tabs of the user interface, where the participants in the group music sharing session may provide input to modify the playlist [Nathanson, column 6, lines 40-55; figure 5], Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach the claim further comprising: while the electronic device is in the communication session: receiving via the one or more input device, an input corresponding to a request to display, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device, the shared content item queue; and in response to receiving the input corresponding to the request to display the shared content item queue, displaying, via the display generation component: a first representation of a first content item included in the shared content item queue…, and a second representation of a second content item included in the shared content item queue. Rounds discloses providing a graphical user interface that identifies and controls the playing of tracks organized by a playlist [paragraph 59]. A playlist tracks icon in the graphical user interface opens the playlist tracks form allowing a user to view the list of tracks loaded for a selected playlist [paragraph 61]. This would allow the user more control over when to view items in the playlist. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a control that displays tracks for a selected playlist, as taught by Rounds. This would allow the user more control over when to view items in the playlist.
Nathanson-Alsina-Rounds teach the first representation of the first content item displayed in association with a representation of a user that added the first content item to the shared content item queue,… the second representation of the second content item displayed in association with a representation of a user that added the second content item to the shared content item queue, by disclosing displaying the playlist in a user interface along with information about the playlist manipulations, for example, by identifying the group member that added a track [column 9, lines 19-27]. This would allow a user to more easily identify which users of the group made modifications to the playlist. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide, for the master playlist, information about the group members that added a track, as taught by Alsina. This would allow a user to more easily identify which users of the group made modifications to the playlist.
8. Claim 7, 10, 12, 16, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344), in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160), and further in view of Lee et al (U.S. Patent No. 7,426,537).
8-1. Regarding claim 7, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 5, further comprising: receiving, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to remove a respective content item included in the shared content item queue from the shared content item queue, by disclosing that participants of the group music sharing session may add or remove songs from the playlist [Nathanson, column 8, lines 51-55].
Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach in response to receiving the input corresponding to the request to remove the respective content item from the shared content item queue, displaying, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device, a visual indication that indicates that the respective content item will be removed from the shared content item queue for the electronic device and for the plurality of second electronic devices. Lee discloses that a user can initiate a shared audio experience with a remote user [column 8, lines 54-61] where a playlist of audio tracks are played in a shared audio experience [column 9, lines 16-27; column 16, lines 10-23]. While in the shared audio experience, messages corresponding to a variety of actions can be communicated between sharing clients, including a remove action that removes a track from the playlist [column 14, lines 24-26; column 15, lines 49-54; column 16, lines 38-41, 50-54]. A status display can be provided in a messenger window that provides session status associated with a content sharing session by displaying a text message providing an indication that a certain event has occurred [column 18, lines 1-7]. The status display can provide text messages that indicate that a remote co-user has removed a track [column 18, lines 10-15]. This would help inform the user of any changes to the playlist. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a status display that provides text messages indicating a removed track, as taught by Lee. This would help inform the user of any changes to the playlist.
8-2. Regarding claim 10, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: detecting, via the one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a request to initiate playback of a respective content item, by disclosing that a playlist coordinator receives input from the group leader selecting a song for simultaneous playback on all endpoint devices that are part of the group music sharing session [Nathanson, column 8, lines 56-58].
Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach in response to detecting the input corresponding to a request to initiate playback of the respective content item: in accordance with a determination that the electronic device is in the communication session and the electronic device is in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session and playing a second respective content item when the input corresponding to the request to initiate playback of the respective content item is received: displaying, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device, a selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to cease playing the second respective content item at the electronic device and initiate playback of a predetermined respective portion of the respective content item at the electronic device without initiating playback of the predetermined respective portion of the respective content item at the plurality of second electronic devices; and in accordance with a determination that the electronic device is not in the communication session while the input corresponding to the request to initiate playback of the respective content item is received, forgoing display of the selectable option. Lee discloses that a user can initiate a shared audio experience with a remote user [column 8, lines 54-61] where a playlist of audio tracks are played in a shared audio experience [column 9, lines 16-27; column 16, lines 10-13]. When the invitee accepts an invitation, the playlist on the inviter client is replicated on the invitee client and the music that was playing on the inviter client stops so that progressive downloading and buffering can begin with the first song in the shared playlist [column 16, lines 13-23] for playback [column 17, lines 44-46]. If a user tries to initiate another invitation to share a dynamic content experience while he is already engaged in a content sharing experience, an error message is displayed to inform him that he already has a content sharing session with another co-user [column 18, lines 25-32]. The error message could enable him to end that session and start the new one [column 18, lines 32-33]. As mentioned above, starting a shared audio experience will replicate the playlist of the inviter client to the invitee client and start buffering of the first song on the playlist begins for playback. Thus, the option provided in the error message is only provided when the user is already in a content sharing experience and tries to initiate another invitation to share a dynamic content experience, and selection of the option to end a sharing session with a first invitee and start a new sharing session with a second invitee will initiate playback of a first song in a playlist of the inviter without initiating playback of the first song in the playlist for the first invitee. This would help prevent inadvertently exiting a sharing experience when attempting to start a new sharing experience. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an option to end a current sharing session and begin a new sharing session for playback of a playlist, as taught by Lee. This would help prevent inadvertently exiting a sharing experience when attempting to start a new sharing experience.
8-3. Regarding claim 12, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1. Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach the claim further comprising: after completing playback of a first content item: in accordance with a determination that the electronic device is in the communication session and the electronic device is in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session, initiating playback of a second content item included in a shared content item queue associated with the communication session; and in accordance with a determination that the electronic device is not in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session, initiating playback of a third content item included in a private content item queue not associated with the communication session. Lee discloses that a user can initiate a shared audio experience with a remote user [column 8, lines 54-61] where a playlist of audio tracks are played in a shared audio experience [column 9, lines 16-27; column 16, lines 10-13]. After an inviter has attempted to initiate a shared audio session, the media player of the invitee is converted to content sharing mode, but any content that is already playing continues to play uninterrupted until the invitation is accepted to establish a shared audio session [column 9, lines 6-15; column 10, lines 17-27]. When the invitee accepts an invitation, the playlist on the inviter client is replicated on the invitee client and the music that was playing on the inviter client stops so that progressive downloading and buffering can begin with the first song in the shared playlist [column 16, lines 13-23] for playback [column 17, lines 44-46]. This would allow the inviter to continue using the media player while waiting for the invitee to respond. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allow the media player of the inviter to continue playing uninterrupted while waiting for the invitee to accept the invitation, as taught by Lee. This would allow the inviter to continue using the media player while waiting for the invitee to respond.
8-4. Regarding claim 16, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 15, wherein displaying the visual indication of the first input is in accordance with a determination that the request to modify playback of the content item is a request to modify playback of the content item in a first manner and that the indication of the first input is received while the electronic device is presenting a user interface of a content application associated with the communication session, by disclosing that a media aggregator provides music information such as song information, artist information, artwork, and lyrics for the participants to view while a song is playing [Nathanson, column 6, lines 56-61] and a user interface coordinator displays the music information on one or more tabs of the user interface [Nathanson, column 7, lines 8-10]. Thus, music information of the song selected for play is displayed to indicate the group leader’s input to play the song.
Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach the method further comprises: in response to receiving the indication of the first input: in accordance with a determination that the request to modify playback of the content item is the request to modify playback of the content item in the first manner and that the indication of the first input is received while the electronic device is presenting a user interface of an application different from the content application associated with the communication session, forgoing displaying the visual indication of the first input. Lee discloses that a user can initiate a shared audio experience with a remote user [column 8, lines 54-61] where a playlist of audio tracks are played in a shared audio experience [column 9, lines 16-27; column 16, lines 10-23]. While in the shared audio experience, messages corresponding to a variety of actions can be communicated between sharing clients [column 14, lines 24-26; column 16, lines 38-41, 50-54]. A status display can be provided in a messenger window that provides session status associated with a content sharing session by displaying a text message providing an indication that a certain event has occurred [column 18, lines 1-15]. This would help inform the user of any changes to the playlist. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a status display that provides text messages indicating a removed track, as taught by Lee. This would help inform the user of any changes to the playlist. Since the text messages of events is displayed in the messenger window, if another application were to occlude the messenger window, such text messages would not be displayed.
8-5. Regarding claim 22, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, further comprising: while the electronic device is in the communication session and while the electronic device is in the first shared content playback mode of the communication session: receiving, from a respective one of the plurality of second electronic devices, an indication of a first input corresponding to a request to modify playback of the content item at the electronic device and the plurality of second electronic devices; in response to receiving the indication of the first input: modifying playback of the content item at the electronic device in accordance with the first input, by disclosing that the group leader controls the music playback in the group music sharing session for all participants in the group [Nathanson, column 6, lines 32-34]. The first participant may transfer leadership (and control of music playback) permanently or temporarily to one or more of the remaining participants [Nathanson, column 6, lines 36-39].
Nathanson-Alsina teach displaying, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device, a visual indication of the first input, by disclosing that a media aggregator provides music information such as song information, artist information, artwork, and lyrics for the participants to view while a song is playing [Nathanson, column 6, lines 56-61] and a user interface coordinator displays the music information on one or more tabs of the user interface [Nathanson, column 7, lines 8-10]. Thus, music information of the song selected for play is displayed to indicate the group leader’s input to play the song.
Nathanson-Alsina teach… while the electronic device is in the private content playback mode of the communication session, being in communication with the plurality of second electronic devices in the communication session, by disclosing that that while in the video conferencing session, participants may communicate with each other [Nathanson, column 2, lines 33-44; column 3, lines 7-11]. A chatroom or group text may persist after a participating member leaves the group [Alsina, column 8, lines 31-37].
Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach that the visual indication of the first input includes a visual indication of the respective one of the plurality of second electronic devices. Lee discloses a content sharing session between users wherein a playlist of audio tracks is synchronously played for each of the users in the content sharing session [column 13, lines 13-22; column 16, lines 10-23]. A status display provides text messages indicting actions made by the users in the content sharing session, such as which user added a track, removed a track, skipped a track, changed the playlist order, paused playing, stopped playing, restarted playing, changed playlists, or the like [column 18, lines 1-15]. This would reduce confusion among the participants of the collaboration session when a playback control is performed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a status display comprising text messages indicating actions performed by users as taught by Lee. This would reduce confusion among the participants of the collaboration session when a playback control is performed.
9. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344), in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160), in view of Shenoy et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,288,304), and further in view of Rotholtz et al (Pub. No. US 2008/0195239).
9-1. Regarding claim 9, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 5, further comprising: after playing a first content item in the shared content item queue: in accordance with a determination that the shared content item queue includes a second content item after the first content item in the shared content item queue, initiating playback of the second content item, by disclosing that a playlist coordinator receives input from the group leader selecting a song from the playlist for simultaneous playback on all endpoint devices that are part of the group music sharing session [Nathanson, column 8, lines 56-58].
Nathenson-Alsina do not expressly teach in accordance with a determination that the shared content item queue does not include the second content item after the first content item in the shared content item queue, playing, during the communication session, one or more content items. Shenoy discloses techniques for synchronized shared playlist editing and playback [column 3, lines 46-54]. When certain content in a shared playlist is not available for all listening devices, gap-filling may be performed [column 11, lines 51-65] by determining whether all of the tracks are in libraries of content provisioning services available to a listening client device [column 12, lines 15-31] and if not, locating an alternative source for the unavailable tracks [column 12, lines 37-50]. If the missing content is not available from an alternative source, or when there are no more tracks in the playlist but continued playback at the listening client devices is desirable, an alternative content gap-fill content may be selected based upon a number of factors, and the playlist can be generated and shared using the alternative content selected [column 13, lines 4-14]. This would provide appropriate content for a more continuous playback experience. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide gap-filling alternative content, as taught by Shenoy. This would provide appropriate content for a more continuous playback experience.
Nathenson-Alsina-Shenoy do not expressly teach that the one or more content items are selected based on the plurality of content items previously included in the shared content item queue of the communication session and content consumption histories of a user account associated with the electronic device and a plurality of user accounts associated with the plurality of second electronic devices. Rotholtz discloses that it was well known to select tracks for a collaborative playlist based on at least a portion of the listening history of a first user combined with at least a portion of the listening history of a second user [paragraph 4] and according to one or more rules [paragraph 6]. This would provide tracks in a shared playlist that are more satisfactory for each user. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select tracks for gap-filling of Nathenson-Alsina-Shenoy based on listening histories of users, as taught by Rotholtz. This would provide tracks in a shared playlist that are more satisfactory for each user.
10. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344), in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160), and further in view of Johnston et al (U.S. Patent No. 10,209,866).
10-1. Regarding claim 14, Nathanson-Alsina teach all the limitations of claim 1, wherein while the electronic device is in the communication session, the electronic device has access to a first respective content application for playing content associated with the communication session, by disclosing a multimedia player that transmits music and music information to the participants to create a synchronized music listening experience on the endpoint devices [Nathanson, column 7, lines 1-7].
Nathanson-Alsina teach the method further comprises: while the electronic device is in a respective communication session with one or more third electronic devices, the one or more third electronic devices associated with one or more third users different from the user of the electronic device: receiving, from a respective one of the one or more third electronic devices, an indication of shared playback of a respective content item associated with the respective communication session, by disclosing that the group leader controls the music playback in the group music sharing session for all participants in the group [Nathanson, column 6, lines 32-34]. The first participant may transfer leadership (and control of music playback) permanently or temporarily to one or more of the remaining participants [Nathanson, column 6, lines 36-39].
Nathanson-Alsina do not expressly teach in response to receiving the indication of the shared playback of the respective content item, in accordance with a determination that the electronic device does not have access to a second respective content application for playing content associated with the respective communication session, displaying, via a display generation component in communication with the electronic device, a selectable option that, when selected, causes the electronic device to initiate a process to gain access to the second respective content application. Johnston discloses receiving, via one or more input devices, an input corresponding to a selection of a respective representation of the respective suggested media item and in response, displaying a prompt to install the respective media application on the electronic device (e.g. because no media application for viewing the respective media item is installed on the electronic device, selection of the respective media item for playback prompts the user to install a media application for viewing the respective media item) [column 45, lines 44-58]. This would provide a convenient way for an electronic device to access a media item that was previously inaccessible. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a prompt that allows for the installation of a media application onto an electronic device in accordance with a determination that the electronic device does not have access to the media application for playing content associated with the media item, as taught by Johnston. This would provide a convenient way for an electronic device to access a media item that was previously inaccessible.
11. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344), in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160), in view of Lee et al (U.S. Patent No. 7,426,537), and further in view of De Munck et al (Pub. No. US 2021/0065120).
11-1. Regarding claim 17, Nathanson-Alsina-Lee teach all the limitations of claim 16. Nathanson-Alsina-Lee do not expressly teach the claim further comprising: in response to receiving the indication of the first input: in accordance with a determination that the request to modify playback of the content item is a request to modify playback of the content item in a second manner different from the first manner, displaying the visual indication of the first input irrespective of whether the electronic device is presenting a user interface of the content application associated with the communication session or a user interface of the application different from the content application associated with the communication session when the indication of the first input is received. De Munck discloses that it was well known to display notifications as a pop-up message on the GUI of a device, so that users are more aware of the receipt of notification, enabling a quick response [paragraph 19]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display some of the text messages providing an indication that a certain event has occurred of Nathanson-Alsina-Lee, in a pop-up window, as taught by De Munck. This would make users more aware of the receipt of notification, enabling a quick response.
Response to Arguments
12. The Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s amendments to claims 1-5, 7-12, 15, 18, and 20-22, and the addition of claim 23.
Regarding independent claim 1, Applicant alleges that Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344) and Chiu (Pub. No. US 2006/0056614) do not disclose, teach, or suggest “a private content playback mode of the communication session that includes playback of the content item at the electronic device without including playback of the content item at the one or more second electronic devices that are in a second shared content playback mode of the communication session," as has been amended to the claim. Examiner has rejected claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathanson (U.S. Patent No. 11,507,344) in view of Alsina et al (U.S. Patent No. 11,304,160). Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Applicant alleges that Alsina fails to disclose, teach, or suggest synchronized playback groups associated with a communication session. Examiner notes that the combination of Nathanson in view of Alsina teaches the limitation. Nathanson-Alsina disclose that that while in the video conferencing session, participants may communicate with each other [Nathanson, column 2, lines 33-44; column 3, lines 7-11]. A chatroom or group text may persist after a participating member leaves the group [Alsina, column 8, lines 31-37]. Thus, a communication session may still exist between members that belong to different groups, each group having synchronized playback for members within the group.
Similar arguments have been presented for independent claims 20 and 21 and thus, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive for the same reasons.
Applicant states that dependent claims 2-19 and 22-23 recite all the limitations of the independent claim, and thus, are allowable in view of the remarks set forth regarding independent claim 1. However, as discussed above, Nathanson in view of Alsina are considered to teach claim 1, and consequently, claims 2-19 and 22-23 are rejected.
Examiner suggests amending the independent claim to include, along with the characteristics unique to the first shared content playback mode and the private content playback mode, claim limitations describing how the first shared content playback mode and the private content playback mode are functionally related to each other (i.e., the sequence of steps and available functions provided to the user that allow the user to navigate from one mode to another), as opposed to merely claiming the first and second modes as two possible scenarios the user may encounter.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALVIN H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8595. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALVIN H TAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights