Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/130,138

METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR SELECTING AND PRESENTING CONTENT BASED ON DYNAMICALLY IDENTIFYING MICROGENRES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONTENT

Final Rejection §101
Filed
Apr 03, 2023
Examiner
MOSER, BRUCE M
Art Unit
2154
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Adeia Guides Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
631 granted / 745 resolved
+29.7% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
792
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.9%
-29.1% vs TC avg
§103
33.4%
-6.6% vs TC avg
§102
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
§112
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 745 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Detailed Action In amendments dated 7/25/25, Applicant amended claims 23-25, 27-28, 32-35, 37-38, and 42, canceled claims 26 and 36, and added new claims 43-44. Claims 23-25, 27-35, and 37-44 are presented for examination. Objections The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph 0143 component 1002 is identified as representing the network in figure 10 but in the figure the network is shown as component 1004. Appropriate correction is required. Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 23-25, 27-35, and 37-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental processes without significantly more. Independent claims 23 and 33 each recites generating, in a vector space, a first vector for a first user based at least in part on media asset consumption history of the first user, wherein the first vector comprises a first portion indicative of one or more channels or genres associated with the media asset consumption history of the first user, and a second portion indicative of one or more consumption times associated with the media asset consumption history of the first user; generating, in the vector space, a second vector for a second user based at least in part on media asset consumption history of the second user, wherein the second vector comprises a third portion indicative of one or more channels or genres associated with the media asset consumption history of the second user, and a fourth portion indicative of one or more consumption times associated with the media asset consumption history of the second user; based at least in part on comparing the second portion of the first vector and the fourth portion of the second vector, determining a predicted time in the future when the first user and the second user are likely to consume a media asset together; based at least in part on comparing the first portion of the first vector and the third portion of the second vector, identifying a recommended media asset available at the predicted time; determining that a current time matches the predicted time when the first and second user are likely to consume the recommended media asset together; and based at least in part on the input and the determining that the current time matches the predicted time when the first user and the second user are likely to consume the recommended media asset together, and without receiving input from the remote control or the mobile device of a title of the recommended media asset: generating, for display on the display device or the mobile device, an identifier for the recommended media asset identifier. Generating first and second vectors are generating data and mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper; determining a predicted time is evaluating and a mental process; identifying a media asset is evaluating and a mental process; determining a current time matches a predicted time is evaluating and a mental process; and generating a media asset identifier for display is generating data for display and a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Each claim recites an additional element of receiving input from a remote control associated with a display device or a mobile device, which is an input step and insignificant extra-solution activity. Examiner notes specification paragraph 0037 states “it can be difficult and/or time consuming to enter queries on such a limited input device.” Claim 33 recites control circuitry and display circuitry, which are generic components of a computer system. Paragraph 0037 also discusses how a stochastic signature is particularly useful in addressing this problem but such a signature is not claimed. The claims recite several actions that the invention takes but without details from the invention, and the claim steps do not recite a particular improvement in any technology or function of a computer per MPEP 2106.04(d) and do not recite any unconventional steps in the invention per MPEP 2106.05(a). Therefore, the recited mental processes are not integrated into a practical application. Taking the claims as a whole, the input step is recited broadly and amounts to receiving data over a network per specification paragraph 0143 and figure 10 component 1004, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. The control circuity and display circuitry in claim 33 are still generic computer components. Therefore these claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the cited mental processes. Claims 24 and 34 each recites generating, in the vector space, a third vector based at least in part on a collective media asset consumption history of a plurality of users comprising the first user and the second user, wherein the identifying of the recommended media asset identifier is further performed based at least in part on the third vector (generating a signature is generating data and a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper, and identifying a media asset identifier is evaluating data which is a mental processes). Claims 25 and 35 each recites wherein the plurality of users further comprises a third user, and the third vector is generated based on the collective media consumption history of the first user, the second user and the third user (generating a signature is generating data and a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Claims 27 and 37 each recites the predicted time is further determined by: identifying a first time when a first media asset having characteristics matching characteristics associated with the first portion of the first vector and the third portion of the second vector is available; determining that the first time corresponds to a time when the first user and the second user are likely to consume content; and identifying the first time as the predicted time (identifying a time and determining a time are evaluations and mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Claims 28 and 38 each recites the recommended media asset identifier is generated for display at a computing device, and each of the first user and the second user are users of the same household associated with the computing device, and determining the predicted time in the future when the first user and the second user are likely to consume the recommended media asset together further comprises determining, based at least in part on the first vector and the second vector, that the first and second user are likely to consume the recommended media asset at the computing device within the same household at the predicted time in the future (generating an identifier is generating data and a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper, and determining a time is an evaluation and a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Claims 29 and 39 each recites the predicted time is further determined by: determining the first user and the second user previously consumed a second media asset together at a second time prior to the first time; and determining that the second media asset is related to the first media asset, the first time corresponds to a time of day on a particular day of the week; and the second time corresponds to the same time of day on a different day of the week (determining is evaluating and a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Claims 30 and 40 each recites wherein each of the first media asset and the second media asset is part of a same episodic series (data is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Claims 31 and 41 each recites wherein the first user and the second user are included in a plurality of users, and the plurality of users are users of a same household or users that use a same media account to consume media assets (users consuming media assets is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Claims 32 and 42 each recites wherein the first vector is generated based at least in part on media asset consumption history of the first user at particular time slots on particular days of the week, and the second vector is based at least in part on media asset consumption history of the second user at particular time slots on particular days of the week (generating data is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper). Claim 43 recites wherein the input is received from the remote control, and the display device is a television, and the identifier for the recommended media asset is generated for display on the display device (receiving data and displaying data are recited broadly and amounts to receiving and sending data over a network per specification paragraph 0143 and figure 10 component 1004, which are each routine and conventional activities per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II). Claim 44 recites wherein the first vector and the second vector are stored as sparse vectors (storing data is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II). Responses to Applicant’s Remarks Regarding rejections of claims 23-42 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over March in view of Sugimoto, Applicant’s amendments overcome March’s and Sugimoto’s teachings, in particular reciting vectors with portions for consumption times associated with media asset consumption history of users and determining a predicted time based at least in part on said recited vectors and vector portions, and these rejections are withdrawn. Regarding rejections of claims 23-42 under 35 U.S.C. 101 for reciting mental processes without significantly more, Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. On pages 10 of his Remarks, Applicant asserts “the claimed first and second vectors generated in a vector space, each comprising portions indicative of historical media consumption preferences (genres or channels) and historical media consumption session times, provide an efficient manner for storage, retrieval, and comparison of media consumption data as between the first and second user, to identify a recommended media asset of interest to the first user and the second user (e.g., family members in a household) at a suitable predicted time when the first user and the second user are likely to consume content together,” and “as stated in paragraph 0037, the user of such vectors helps provide a technological solution to the technological problem that ‘in the context of a user device with limited input capability, for example, a television remote control, ... it can be difficult and/or time consuming to enter queries on such a limited input device.’” Examiner notes that while the claims do recite first and second vectors in the manner Applicant describes, paragraph 0037 states stochastic signatures, which are described in paragraph 0036 as a probabilistic model, are what is stated as “particularly useful” because “it can be difficult and/or time consuming to enter queries on such a limited input device” but stochastic signatures are not claimed. The functions recited using the vectors and vector portions are “determining a predicted time in the future when the first user and the second user are likely to consume a media asset together;” “identifying a recommended media asset available at the predicted time;” and “determining that a current time matches the predicted time when the first and second user are likely to consume the recommended media asset together;” and each is recited without specific inventive details reciting how the invention uses the vectors or vector portions or how the invention performs each function. The recited steps are very conventional and Examiner does not see how the invention improves the technology of entering queries with a limited input device or a function of a computer as required in a practical application per MPEP 2106.04(d). Examiner notes claims 27 and 37 recite details on how the invention identifies a time as a predicted time, and determining when a current time matches a predicted time appear to be discussed in specification paragraphs 0053-0055 using signatures. 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. Inquiry Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE M MOSER whose telephone number is (571)270-1718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p. 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, Boris Gorney can be reached at 571 270-5626. 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. /BRUCE M MOSER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154 10/6/25
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 03, 2023
Application Filed
May 01, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Aug 05, 2024
Response Filed
Aug 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §101
Dec 02, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 09, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Jul 03, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 25, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §101
Jan 16, 2026
Interview Requested
Jan 26, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 26, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602403
SCALABLE PARALLEL CONSTRUCTION OF BOUNDING VOLUME HIERARCHIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12585717
System and Method for Recommending Users Based on Shared Digital Experiences
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579198
TEXT STRING COMPARISON FOR DUPLICATE OR NEAR-DUPLICATE TEXT DOCUMENTS IDENTIFIED USING AUTOMATED NEAR-DUPLICATE DETECTION FOR TEXT DOCUMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12554783
USING DISCOVERED UNIFORM RESOURCE IDENTIFIER INFORMATION TO PERFORM EXPLOITATION TESTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12530419
DATA MANAGEMENT APPARATUS, DATA MANAGEMENT METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 745 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month