DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on 10/17/2025 has been entered.
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
As per instant Amendment, Claims 2, 12, 18, and 28 are canceled; Claims 34-46 have been added; Claims 1, 9, 17, 25, 34, 37, 40, and 44 are independent claims. Claims 1, 3-11, 13-17, 19-27, and 29-46 have been examined and are pending.
Response to Arguments
The non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection to claims 1, 3-11, 13-17, 19-27, and 29-46 is maintained.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 3-11, 13-17, 19-27, and 29-46 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,373,009. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim(s) 1, 3-11, 13-17, 19-27, and 29-46 are broader and similar in scope to claim(s) 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,373,009. If the claims in Application No. 17/824,281 are allowed, it could improperly extend the “right to exclude” for the same invention in two different Patents.
Claims 1, 3-11, 13-17, 19-27, and 29-46 are directed to methods and apparatuses; said methods and apparatuses are associated with the methods and system claimed in claim(s) 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,373,009.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 11,373,009 and is covered by U.S. Patent No. 11,373,009 since U.S. Patent No. 11,373,009 and the instant application are claiming common subject matter.
Application No. 17/824,281 (Instant App.)
US Patent No. 11,373,009
Claim 1: A method comprising:
sending, by a computing device, a playlist indicating a playback order of a plurality of segments of a content item; receiving one or more requests for the plurality of segments;
sending the plurality of segments, wherein one or more of the plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data usable to verify the plurality of segments before output; and causing, based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, an error routine.
Claim 1: A method comprising:
sending, by a first computing device, a playlist indicating a playback order of a plurality of segments of a content item;
generating confirmation data based on the playlist; and
sending the plurality of segments, wherein at least one first segment, of the plurality of segments, comprises the confirmation data, and at least one second segment, of the plurality of segments, does not comprise the confirmation data, wherein the at least one first segment and the at least one second segment are to be verified by a second computing device before output.
Claim 9: A method comprising:
sending, by a computing device based on a playlist, one or more requests for a plurality of segments of a content item; receiving the plurality of segments, wherein the one or more plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data;
based on verifying one or more of the plurality of segments using confirmation data, causing output, via a visual display device, of the one or more of the plurality of segments in a playback order indicated by the playlist; and
based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, causing sending of an error message.
Claim 7: A method comprising:
sending, by a computing device based on a playlist, requests for a plurality of segments of a content item;
receiving the plurality of the segments;
determining that a first segment, of the plurality of the segments, comprises confirmation data for the playlist and a second segment, of the plurality of the segments, does not comprise any confirmation data; and
based on verifying the first segment and the second segment, causing output, via a visual display device, of the first segment and the second segment in a playback order indicated by the playlist.
Claim 17: An apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
send a playlist indicating a playback order of a plurality of segments of a content item; receive one or more requests for the plurality of segments;
send the plurality of segments, wherein one or more the plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data usable to verify the plurality of segments before output; and
cause, based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, an error routine.
Claim 16: A system comprising:
a server and a content player,
wherein the server comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the server to:
send a playlist indicating a playback order of segments of a content item; and
send, based on one or more requests for segments of the content item, the segments of the content item, wherein fewer than all of the segments comprise confirmation data corresponding to the playlist; and
wherein the content player comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the content player, cause the content player to:
send the one or more requests for the segments of the content item;
receive the segments of the content item; and
verify the segments based on the confirmation data corresponding to the playlist in fewer than all of the segments.
Claim 25: An apparatus comprising:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to:
send, based on a playlist, one or more requests for a plurality of segments of a content item;
receive the plurality of segments, wherein the one or more plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data;
based on verifying one or more of the plurality of segments using confirmation data, cause output, via a visual display device, of the one or more of the plurality of segments in a playback order indicated by the playlist; and
based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, causing sending of an error message.
Claim 16: A system comprising:
a server and a content player,
wherein the server comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the server to:
send a playlist indicating a playback order of segments of a content item; and
send, based on one or more requests for segments of the content item, the segments of the content item, wherein fewer than all of the segments comprise confirmation data corresponding to the playlist; and
wherein the content player comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the content player, cause the content player to:
send the one or more requests for the segments of the content item;
receive the segments of the content item; and
verify the segments based on the confirmation data corresponding to the playlist in fewer than all of the segments.
Claim 34: One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed, cause: sending, by a computing device, a playlist indicating a playback order of a plurality of segments of a content item; receiving one or more requests for the plurality of segments; sending the plurality of segments, wherein one or more of the plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data usable to verify the plurality of segments before output; and causing, based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, an error routine.
Claim 1: A method comprising:
sending, by a first computing device, a playlist indicating a playback order of a plurality of segments of a content item;
generating confirmation data based on the playlist; and
sending the plurality of segments, wherein at least one first segment, of the plurality of segments, comprises the confirmation data, and at least one second segment, of the plurality of segments, does not comprise the confirmation data, wherein the at least one first segment and the at least one second segment are to be verified by a second computing device before output.
Claim 37: One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed, cause: sending, by a computing device based on a playlist, one or more requests for a plurality of segments of a content item; receiving the plurality of segments, wherein the one or more plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data; based on verifying one or more of the plurality of segments using confirmation data, causing output, via a visual display device, of the one or more of the plurality of segments in a playback order indicated by the playlist; and based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, causing sending of an error message.
Claim 7: A method comprising:
sending, by a computing device based on a playlist, requests for a plurality of segments of a content item;
receiving the plurality of the segments;
determining that a first segment, of the plurality of the segments, comprises confirmation data for the playlist and a second segment, of the plurality of the segments, does not comprise any confirmation data; and
based on verifying the first segment and the second segment, causing output, via a visual display device, of the first segment and the second segment in a playback order indicated by the playlist.
Claim 40: A system comprising: an apparatus configured to: send a playlist indicating a playback order of a plurality of segments of a content item; receive one or more requests for the plurality of segments; send the plurality of segments, wherein one or more the plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data usable to verify the plurality of segments before output; and cause, based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, an error routine; and a computing device configured to send the one or more requests for the plurality of segments.
Claim 16: A system comprising:
a server and a content player,
wherein the server comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the server to:
send a playlist indicating a playback order of segments of a content item; and
send, based on one or more requests for segments of the content item, the segments of the content item, wherein fewer than all of the segments comprise confirmation data corresponding to the playlist; and
wherein the content player comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the content player, cause the content player to:
send the one or more requests for the segments of the content item;
receive the segments of the content item; and
verify the segments based on the confirmation data corresponding to the playlist in fewer than all of the segments.
Claim 44: A system comprising: an apparatus configured to: send, based on a playlist, one or more requests for a plurality of segments of a content item; receive the plurality of segments, wherein the one or more plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data; based on verifying one or more of the plurality of segments using confirmation data, cause output, via a visual display device, of the one or more of the plurality of segments in a playback order indicated by the playlist; and based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, causing sending of an error message; and a computing device configured to send the one or more requests for the plurality of segments of the content item.
Claim 16: A system comprising:
a server and a content player,
wherein the server comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the server to:
send a playlist indicating a playback order of segments of a content item; and
send, based on one or more requests for segments of the content item, the segments of the content item, wherein fewer than all of the segments comprise confirmation data corresponding to the playlist; and
wherein the content player comprises:
one or more processors; and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the content player, cause the content player to:
send the one or more requests for the segments of the content item;
receive the segments of the content item; and
verify the segments based on the confirmation data corresponding to the playlist in fewer than all of the segments.
Allowable Subject Matter
Regarding Claims 1, 3-11, 13-17, 19-27, and 29-46, Claims 1, 3-11, 13-17, 19-27, and 29-46 are allowed over the cited prior art.
The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The closest prior art, as previously recited, includes Kamekura et al. (US 2017/0094338; Hereinafter “Kamekura”) in view of Loheide et al. (US 2018/0343489; Hereinafter “Loheide’’). However, none of Kamekura and Loheide teaches or suggests, alone or in combination, the particular combination of steps or elements as recited in the independent claims 1, 9, 17, and 25. For example, none of the cited prior art teaches or suggest the steps of “a method comprising: sending, by a computing device, a playlist indicating a playback order of a plurality of segments of a content item; receiving one or more requests for the plurality of segments; sending the plurality of segments, wherein one or more of the plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data usable to verify the plurality of segments before output; and causing, based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, an error routine” as recited in independent claims 1, 17, 34, and 40; and “sending, by a computing device based on a playlist, one or more requests for a plurality of segments of a content item; receiving the plurality of segments, wherein the one or more plurality of segments omits, based on one or more rules, confirmation data; based on verifying one or more of the plurality of segments using the-confirmation data, causing output, via a visual display device, of the one or more of the plurality of segments in a playback order indicated by the playlist; and based on determining that no confirmation data is included in a segment of the content item and that an amount of time has elapsed following reception of confirmation data associated with the content item, causing sending of an error message” as recited in independent claims 9, 25, 37, and 44. As a result, the claims are allowable over the cited prior art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 Nelson Giddins whose telephone number is (571)272-7993. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Linglan Edwards can be reached at (571) 270-5440. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/NELSON S. GIDDINS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2408