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 .
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 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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.
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 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker et al. (Walker) (US 2012/0210382 A1) (of record) in view of Kahn et al. (Kahn) (US 2007/0265966).
As to claims 1 and 15, Walker discloses a method, and corresponding non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions (see Fig. 1, 3-4), comprising:
receiving, by a recording management system associated with a first storage and a second storage (central office 103 including archive storage 302 and active storage 301; Fig. 1, 3, paragraph 22), a request, associated with a user, for a first content segment of a sequence of content segments (paragraph 50-51), wherein the sequence of content segments is stored in the first storage (request for content contained within the archive storage; paragraph 51), wherein the first content segment corresponds to a requested output point in the sequence of content segments that is subsequent to a start of the sequence of content segments (paragraph 70);
storing, by the recording management system, in the second storage, a copy of the first content segment (reconstituting portion of the archived program to active storage; paragraph 51-52, 70-71) and copies of one or more second content segments following the requested output point to an end of the sequence of content segments (reconstituting segments occurring after the requested time position; paragraph 52, 70);
sending, to a device associated with the user, the copy of the first content segment (streaming the program from the active storage to the user for playback; paragraph 52, 70-71) and the copies of the one or more second content segments (streaming the program from the active storage to the user for playback; paragraph 52, 70); and
based on determining that one or more third segments from the start of the sequence of content segments to the requested output point are not stored in the second storage, storing in the second storage, a copy of the one of the one or more third segments (dynamic reconstitution in both directions from selected start point, to reconstitute the beginning of the program; see paragraph 71, or reconstituting earlier portions in response to a user rewind command; paragraph 52, 70).
While Walker discloses storing the entire media content in the second storage (paragraph 52), and storing the one or more third segments simultaneously with the storage of copies of the one or more second content segments (dynamically reconstituting earlier portions at the same time as later portions; paragraph 71), Walker fails to explicitly disclose storing one or more third segments after storage of the copies of the one or more second content segments from the requested output point to the end of the sequence of content segments.
In an analogous art, Kahn discloses a content delivery system (paragraph 42-45) wherein a user may select a requested output point in a sequence of content segments that is subsequent to a start of the sequence of content segments (Fig. 13, paragraph 138) and the system may store the beginning portion simultaneously with the remainder of the program (paragraph 138) or store the beginning portion of the program after storage of the remainder of the program from the requested output point to the end of the sequence of content segments (download the portion 1345 now, and record the portion 1320 at a later time; 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 modify Walker’s system to include storing one or more third segments after storage of the copies of the one or more second content segments from the requested output point to the end of the sequence of content segments, as taught in combination with Kahn, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, in this case through the use of a known technique for storing content in a particular order which makes the earliest portion of content available for rewinding once the selected portion of content has been fully downloaded. The storing of the final portions of the content first before the initial portions, would constitute a simple substitution of one known method for another to obtain predictable results, as the requested portion would be prioritized and stored first, while still storing the initial portion in case of a user rewind command, as desired by Walker.
As to claim 8, Walker discloses a device (see Fig. 1, 3) comprising:
one or more processors (central office 103 including multiple servers; Fig. 1, 3, paragraph 22, 73); and
memory storing instructions (paragraph 22, 73) that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to:
receive, using a recording management system associated with a first storage and a second storage (central office 103 including archive storage 302 and active storage 301; Fig. 1, 3, paragraph 22), a request, associated with a user, for a first content segment of a sequence of content segments (paragraph 50-51), wherein the sequence of content segments is stored in the first storage (request for content contained within the archive storage; paragraph 51), wherein the first content segment corresponds to a requested output point in the sequence of content segments that is subsequent to a start of the sequence of content segments (paragraph 70);
store, using the recording management system, in the second storage, a copy of the first content segment (reconstituting portion of the archived program to active storage; paragraph 51-52, 70-71) and copies of one or more second content segments following the requested output point to an end of the sequence of content segments (reconstituting segments occurring after the requested time position; paragraph 52, 70);
send, to second a device associated with the user, the copy of the first content segment (streaming the program from the active storage to the user for playback; paragraph 52, 70-71) and the copies of the one or more second content segments (streaming the program from the active storage to the user for playback; paragraph 52, 70); and
based on determining that one or more third segments from the start of the sequence of content segments to the requested output point are not stored in the second storage, storing in the second storage, a copy of the one of the one or more third segments (dynamic reconstitution in both directions from selected start point, to reconstitute the beginning of the program; see paragraph 71, or reconstituting earlier portions in response to a user rewind command; paragraph 52, 70).
While Walker discloses storing the entire media content in the second storage (paragraph 52), and storing the one or more third segments simultaneously with the storage of copies of the one or more second content segments (dynamically reconstituting earlier portions at the same time as later portions; paragraph 71), Walker fails to explicitly disclose storing one or more third segments after storage of the copies of the one or more second content segments from the requested output point to the end of the sequence of content segments.
In an analogous art, Kahn discloses a content delivery system (paragraph 42-45) wherein a user may select a requested output point in a sequence of content segments that is subsequent to a start of the sequence of content segments (Fig. 13, paragraph 138) and the system may store the beginning portion simultaneously with the remainder of the program (paragraph 138) or store the beginning portion of the program after storage of the remainder of the program from the requested output point to the end of the sequence of content segments (download the portion 1345 now, and record the portion 1320 at a later time; 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 modify Walker’s system to include storing one or more third segments after storage of the copies of the one or more second content segments from the requested output point to the end of the sequence of content segments, as taught in combination with Kahn, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, in this case through the use of a known technique for storing content in a particular order which makes the earliest portion of content available for rewinding once the selected portion of content has been fully downloaded. The storing of the final portions of the content first before the initial portions, would constitute a simple substitution of one known method for another to obtain predictable results, as the requested portion would be prioritized and stored first, while still storing the initial portion in case of a user rewind command, as desired by Walker.
As to claims 2, 9 and 16, Walker and Kahn disclose receiving a second request, associated with the user, wherein the second request is associated with a temporal location prior to the first content segment in the sequence of content segments (“restart” or “rewind” request to initiate playback of earlier portions of the program; paragraph 52, 70); and
sending, to the device, a copy of at least one of the one or more third content segments corresponding to the temporal location (paragraph 52, 70).
As to claims 3, 10 and 17, Walker and Kahn disclose storing, in the second storage, a copy of at least one of the one or more second content segments of the sequence of content segments that is subsequent to the first content segment in the sequence of content segments (continuing to dynamically reconstitute the program in portions; see Walker at paragraph 70-71);
receiving a third request, associated with the user, wherein the third request is associated with a temporal location subsequent to the first content segment in the sequence of content segments (skip or FFW to later segments; see Walker at paragraph 52, 70-71); and
sending, to the device, the copy of the at least one or more second content segments (see Walker at paragraph 52, 70-71).
As to claims 4, 11, 18, Walker and Kahn disclose wherein the copy of the first content segment and the copy of the at least one of the one or more third content segments are unique to the user (every user allocated a separate active storage space; see Walker at paragraph 26, 28-30).
As to claims 5, 12, 19, Walker and Kahn disclose wherein the first content segment is associated with a mid- point of a content asset (user preferred starting position anywhere within the program; see Walker at paragraph 70-71)
As to claims 6, 13, Walker and Kahn disclose wherein the first storage is associated with an archive storage and the second storage is associated with a playback storage (archive storage and active storage; see Walker at Fig. 3; paragraph 22-23, 51-52).
As to claims 7, 14, Walker and Kahn disclose wherein the playback storage is unique to the user (every user allocated a separate active storage space; see Walker at paragraph 26, 28-30).
As to claim 20, Walker and Kahn disclose wherein the first storage is associated with an archive storage and the second storage is associated with a playback storage (archive storage and active storage; see Walker at Fig. 3; paragraph 22-23, 51-52), wherein the playback storage is unique to the user (every user allocated a separate active storage space; see Walker at paragraph 26, 28-30).
As to claim 21, Walker and Kahn disclose wherein the copy of the at least one of the one or more third content segments is stored in the second storage based on a manifest file indicating an order between the at least one of the one or more third content segments the first content segment (index file; see Walker at paragraph 52).
As to claim 22, Walker and Kahn disclose wherein the request for the first content segment is received via an origin server, and wherein the copy of the first content segment is sent to the device associated with the user via the origin server (see Walker at Fig. 3, content server 106 receiving requests from users and streaming the content to the users; paragraph 49-50).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (571) 272-3982. 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.
/James R Sheleheda/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424