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 .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of a new ground(s) of rejection. The amendments to the claims necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection discussed below. This office action is made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
4. Claims 1-6, 11 and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over REY et al (2012/0030050) in view of MOON et al (2008/0244671) and further in in view of GORDON et al (2012/0278725) and further in view of SORENSON, III (9,621,468) and further in view of GU (2017/0094295)
As to claims 1-6, REY discloses EPG notification device and EPG notification method and further disclose a system (figs.1-4, Electronic Notification Device) for displaying a program source indicator, comprising:
A memory configured to store non-transitory computer readable instructions; and a processor communicatively coupled to the memory (figs.1-4, Electronic Notification Device “END” includes a processor and database, [0080-0081] and [0092]), wherein the processor, when executing the non-transitory computer readable instructions, is configured to:
Receive metadata associated with the a multimedia program (Electronic Notification “EN” figs.3A-7B, [[0095-0096], [0106-0107], [0133] and [0168-0175]), wherein the metadata identifies the first program source and second multimedia or program source (EN-Catch-up service) from which the program may be played (fig.7B, [0014-0017-web], [[0095-0096], [0106-0107], [0116] and [0236]), the Catch-up service is web browser interface that shows various service(s) from which the program may be played; based on the identification of the first program source retrieve the program source indicator, and display the program source indicator within the electronic program guide ([0133-0138]), the Catch-up service metadata includes CH2, CH4, etc., (associated with source identifier) identifies at least one server provider (CH2, CH4, etc.,) from which the program (Drama B1, Drama L, etc.,) may be played; (EPG highlights or provides bold lines as to desired or designated program(s) associated with the channel: within the EN displays DRAMA B1, etc., and associated information; and display the program source indicator within the electronic programming guide (EN-500, [0167-0175]), wherein the metadata comprises content information associated with the program, where the content information comprises a primary focus area opposite of the focus area ([0167-0175]), wherein the processor is further configured to display the program source indicator based on the content information associated with the program, wherein the program is at least one of: a channel, a broadcast media item, a movie, a television show, a video clip, and an Internet streaming media item and selects a program within the EPG by scrolling a list within the EPG of a plurality of programs to ([0124-0129] and [0172-0175]), note shows designated or marked programs on the EPG, marks programs may be based on interest level or interactions and further overlays metadata associated with the program on the EPG, changes display characteristics; the program may be broadcast of streaming media via Internet, satellite and other mediums of communications.
REY compares user’s interactions and renders appropriate source and further discloses multiple sources to retrieve a requested service(s), i.e., a catchup services via a web provider and other service(s) ([0014-0017]), BUT appears silent as to an identification of the source.
However in the same field of endeavor, MOON discloses notification for interactive content and further discloses an identification of a multimedia App, including changing the display characteristic of the program source indicator, changing colors and other graphics or rendering specific types of enhancement associated with the program based on the program information and other conditions, such as ranking, scores, etc. (figs.1, 7-11, [0049-0057]), note the guide includes interactive icon and graphics are overlaid on the EPG, which changes the presentation dynamically.
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of MOON into the system of REY to provide additional enhancement/metadata associated with the EPG cells or grid and further distinguish EPG cell(s) or set(s) of EPG cells within the plurality of cells, from each other.
REY as modified by MOON, appears silent as to compare an efficiency of playing the program from the first program source and from the second program source; based on the comparison of the efficiency, identification of the first program source, retrieve the program source indicator associated with a most efficient service provider, wherein the most efficient service provider is either the first program source or the second program source, and wherein the program source indicator is a graphic associated with the most efficient service provider; and display the program source indicator within the electronic programming guide.
However in the same field of endeavor, GORDON discloses selective filtering of EPG live feeds, comparing an efficiency of playing the program from the first program source and from the second program source; based on the comparison of the efficiency, identification of the first program source, retrieve the program source indicator associated with a most efficient service provider, wherein the most efficient service provider is either the first program source or the second program source, and wherein the program source indicator is a graphic associated with the most efficient service provider; and display the program source indicator within the electronic programming guide, based on capabilities factors as to playback of the content a specific device (figs.1-12, [0031], [0046-0049], [0061-0078], [0111-0115] and [0120-0126]), filtering based on ratings, rankings, quality of rendering one source to another during playback of the video sources based on capabilities of the device.
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of GORDON into the system of REY as modified by MOON to efficiently render the best source(s) for presentation based on quality and other enhancement associated with the audio/video content.
REY as modified by MOON and GORDON, appears silent as to where the comparing of an efficiency of playing one of the multimedia program sources, includes a load-balance determination between the multimedia program sources and wherein the load-balance determination is configured to determine whether playing the multimedia program from the first program source and from the second program source is associated with a bandwidth overload; wherein the content-based load-balance determination is based on a first bandwidth load associated with a first multimedia content from the first program source and a second bandwidth load associated with a second multimedia content from the second program source, and wherein the first multimedia content and the second content correspond to the multimedia program, and wherein the load-balance determination includes a load analysis on the first bandwidth load and the second bandwidth and based on the comparison of the efficiency and the load analysis, retrieve the program source indicator associated with a most efficient service provider wherein the most efficient service provider is either the first program source or the second program source.
However in the same field of endeavor, SORENSON further discloses distributed load balancer system that determines load-balance of packets being received from sources to dynamically adjust the transmission window limits for destinations according to performance feedback to determine optimal or near-optimal limits for rendering packets, where the load-balance determination between the first program source bandwidth limit for output packet transmission schedule (e.g., 10 Gbps) and the second program source bandwidth limit for output packet transmission at least based on a tuner utilization analysis involving a first utilization of the first program source and a second utilization of the second program source”, which includes: media data: stored media and transmission multimedia: voice and other multimedia; media data or multimedia data incudes IPv4, IPv6, etc., : stored media and transmission multimedia: voice and other multimedia programs(s) where the efficiency of rendering the multimedia stream(s) from the source(s) includes wherein the content-based load-balance determination is based on a first content from the first program source and a second content from the second program source, retrieve the program source indicator associated with a most efficient service provider, wherein the most efficient service provider is either the first program source or the second program source (figs.1-12, abstract; Col.3, line 62-Col.4, line 25; Col.8, line 42-Col.9, line 33; Col.9, lines 14-62, Col.12, line 58-Col.13, line 16, Col.16, line 24-Col.17, line 31 and Col.20, lines 6-55), media data or multimedia streams incudes IPv4, IPv6, etc., : stored media and transmission multimedia: voice and other multimedia programs(s) rendering on various multimedia devices; NIC, gateway and other local host devices on a network: where data incudes multimedia: stored media and transmission media.
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of SORENSON into the system of REY as modified by MOON and GORDON to efficiently render the best source(s) for presentation of audio/video content based on quality and other enhancement associated with the audio/video content.
REY as modified by MOON, GORDON and SORENSON, appears silent as to determine a first bandwidth load for only transmitting a first multimedia content from the first program source and a second and a second bandwidth load for only transmitting with a second multimedia content from the second program source, and wherein the first multimedia content and the second content correspond to the multimedia program and further analyzing the bandwidth.
However, in the same field of endeavor, GU discloses bandwidth adjustment for real-time transmission and further discloses determine a first bandwidth load for only transmitting a first multimedia content from the first program source and a second and a second bandwidth load for only transmitting with a second multimedia content from the second program source, and wherein the first multimedia content and the second content correspond to the multimedia program and further analyzing the bandwidth (figs.1-9, Abstract, [0005-0006], [0027-0036], [0055-0061], [0118-0132] and [0173-0156])
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of GU into the system of REY as modified by MOON, GORDON and SORENSON to efficiently render the best source(s) for presentation real-time multimedia based on quality and other enhancement associated with the audio/video content.
As to claim 11, REY further discloses where the first program source and the second program source is at least one of: an Internet-streaming service, a broadband TV service, a satellite TV service network and a DVR ([0123-0126]
Claim 14 is met as previously discussed in claims 1-6.
As to claims 15-19, the claimed “A method for displaying a program…” is composed with the same structural elements that were discussed with respect to claims 1-6.
As to claim 20, the claimed “A method for displaying a program….” is composed with the same structural elements that were discussed with respect to claims 1-6.
5. Claims 7-8, 9-10 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over REY et al (2012/0030050) in view of MOON et al (2008/0244671) and further in in view of GORDON et al (2012/0278725) and further in view of SORENSON, III (9,621,468) and further in view of PARK et al (2015/0163445) and further in view of GU (2017/0094295)
As to claims 7-8, REY as modified by MOON, GORDON, SORENSON and GU, disclose all the claim limitation as discussed above with respect with respect to claims 1-6, and further discloses generating notification information for listing of programs and enables interacting to select program(s) within the EPG and further discloses where the EPG is broadcast using DVB and including images and where the processor is configured to at least change one display characteristic of the program source ID based on the content information associated with the program (see REY: [0008], [0096] and [0111]), BUT appears silent as to where the program source indicator may be at least one of JPEG, PNG, GIF, etc.
However in the same field of endeavor, PARK discloses UI techniques for TV channel changes and where the program source indicator may be at least one of JPEG, PNG, GIF, etc. (figs.1-23, Abstract, [0040]), note the EPG may be displayed as a full screen or scaled and channel list of JPEG image of the programs and may be automatically scrolled or scrolling operation may be controlled by the user (up/down operations) to provide additional data such as previews and other metadata associated with the program.
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of PARK into the system of REY as modified by MOON, GORDON, SORENSON and GU to provide additional enhancement/metadata associated with the EPG cells or grid.
As to claims 9-10, REY as modified by MOON, GORDON, SORENSON and GU, disclose generating notification information for listing of programs and enables interacting to select program(s) within the EPG as discussed above with respect to claims 1-8, BUT appears silent as to where selecting the program within the electronic programing guide comprises scrolling in a list of plurality of programs within the electronic programming guide to receive metadata associated with the plurality of programs within the list of the electronic programming guide.
However in the same field of endeavor, PARK discloses EPG system for channel changes and method and scrolling in a list of plurality of programs within the electronic programming guide to receive metadata associated with the plurality of programs within the list of the electronic programming guide (figs.1-23, [0040-0046], [0060-0066], [0085-0089] and [0103-0106]), note the EPG may be displayed as a full screen or scaled and channel list of programs displayed vertical and may be automatically scrolled or scrolling operation may be controlled by the user (up/down operations) to provide additional data such as previews and other metadata associated with the program.
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of PARK into the system of REY as modified by MOON, GORDON, SORENSON and GU to provide additional enhancement/metadata associated to channel/program changes associated with the EPG.
As to claims 12-13, REY as modified by MOON, GORDON, SORENSON and GU disclose generating notification information for listing of programs and enables interacting to select program(s) within the EPG as discussed above with respect to claim 11, BUT appears silent as to where the comparison of the efficiency of playing the program from the first program source and from the second program source comprises analyzing at least one of: a bandwidth usage, a tuner utilization, and a throughput usage and select the most efficient service provider based on at least one load-balancing factor.
However in the same field of endeavor, PARK further discloses analyzing a usage of the at least one source identifier, wherein the usage comprises at least one of: a bandwidth usage, a tuner utilization, and a throughput usage and select the most efficient service provider based on at least one load-balancing factor ([0033-0039], [0040-0046] and [0066-0076]-not limited), note analyzing channel changes of specific program formats, parsing, re-tuning, filling decoding buffers, etc., under control of the HE.
Hence it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teaching of PARK into the system of REY as modified by MOON, GORDON, SORENSON and GU to efficiently process data associated with channel changes to select desired or best channel(s) based on quality and other factors accordingly.
Double Patenting
6. 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 double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue 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 reference 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. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(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.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent 11,490,166. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
The current application (17/976,433)…equates to…U.S. Pat. (11,490,166).
As to claim 1, the claimed “A system…” equates to “A system…” of Pat ‘166 (col.10, lines 1-30);
The claimed “a memory configured to…” and “a processor…” equates to “a memory configured to…” and “a processor…” of Pat ‘166 (col.10, lines 4-12);
The claimed “receive metadata…”; “compare an efficiency...” and “based on the comparison...” equates to “receive metadata…”; “compare an efficiency...” and “based on the comparison...” of Pat ‘166 (col.10, lines 13-30).
Claims 2-14 equates to claims 2-14 of Pat ‘166 (col.10, line 31-Col.11, line 8).
As to claim 9, the claimed “A method for displaying…” is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed in claim 1.
Claims 16-19 equates to claims 16-19 of Pat ‘166 (col.11, line 35-Col.12, line 12).
As to claim 20, the claimed “A computer-readable media storing non-transitory…” is composed of the same structural elements that were discussed in claim 1.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other; i.e., the current claims are broader in scope than the parent allowed claims. Allowance of claims 1-20 of the instant application would result in an unjustified timewise extension of the monopoly defined by patent claim Y.
Conclusion
8. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNAN Q SHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7355. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4.
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 on 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.
/ANNAN Q SHANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
ANNAN Q. SHANG