DETAILED ACTION
Notice relating to Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Claims
Applicant’s current amendment (dated 09 FEBRUARY 2026), has been entered. The status of the claims is as follows: Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new reference(s) and/or citations being used in the current rejection.
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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-10, and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al., US 2012/0278725 in view of Ellis, US 2007/0157248.
Regarding claim 1, Gordon discloses a computer-implemented method of configuring a content selection interface, the method comprising:
identifying groups of content (can identify and obtain groups/feeds of content; page 8, paragraph 68);
obtaining user activity, wherein the user activity comprises one or more previous interactions by the user with groups of content on a content selection interface (can determine past/previous user interactions, including those with the displayed interface group/feed content(s); page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97); and
ordering groups of content for presentation to the user on the content selection interface based at least in part on the one or more previous interactions by the user (can rearrange/organize and provide sequences, i.e. ordered items, in the groups/feeds based on the past/previous user interactions; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97), wherein the group of content in the ordering of the groups of content is based at leas in part on previous interactions by the user (can rearrange/organize and provide sequences, i.e. ordered items, in the groups/feeds based on the past/previous user interactions; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97).
Gordon does not explicitly disclose interactions with content within groups of content, and
ordering groups of content such that a place of at least one group of content in the ordering of the groups of content is based at least in part on interactions by the user with content within the groups of content, wherein the place of a group of content in the ordering of the groups of content is based at least in part on interactions by the user with content within that group of content or within a related group of content, wherein a related group of content is a group of content having a same or related theme or comprising at least one content item in common with that group of content.
In a related art, Ellis does disclose previous interactions with content within groups of content (based on a user frequently accessing, i.e. previous interaction(s), certain content/channels which are associated with a certain channel group; page 11, paragraph 106), and
ordering groups of content such that a place of at least one group of content in the ordering of the groups of content is based at least in part on previous interactions by the user with content within the groups of content (based on a user frequently accessing, i.e. previous interaction(s), certain content/channels which are associated with certain channel group, system can rank/order the channel group such that it appears prominently displayed in a certain area, i.e. first; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710, and element 701, and Fig. 9, elements 950, and wherein user can also designate, i.e. a previous interaction, a favorite channel group such that it will be rank/ordered and appear prominently displayed in a certain area, i.e. first; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710), wherein the place of a group of content in the ordering of the groups of content is based at least in part on previous interactions by the user with content within that group of content or within a related group of content, wherein a related group of content is a group of content having a same or related theme or comprising at least one content item in common with that group of content (again based on a user frequently accessing, i.e. previous interaction(s), certain content/channels which are associated with certain channel group, i.e. in that group, system can rank/order the channel group such that it appears prominently displayed in a certain area, i.e. first; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710, and element 701, and Fig. 9, elements 950, and wherein user can also designate, i.e. a previous interaction, a favorite channel group such that it will be rank/ordered and appear prominently displayed in a certain area, i.e. first; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the prior art of Gordon and Ellis by allowing user interaction/browsing to be utilized when organizing an arrangement of display of content, such as the display already disclosed in Gordon, in order to provide an improved system and method for an interactive media guidance application that provides channel groups (Ellis; page 1, paragraph 6).
Regarding claim 2, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the user interface comprises a plurality of scrollable carousels and the method comprises providing respective groups of content to the user in respective carousels of the user interface, and the ordering of the groups of content comprises ordering the carousels in the user interface (Gordon; with scrollable carousels; page 2, paragraph 10, and which can be sorted according to certain conditions; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97).
Regarding claim 3, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses monitoring user interactions with groups of content on a user interface, wherein the user interaction with groups of content on the user interface comprises one or more of: selecting content from a group of content or a related group of content, scrolling through content in a group of content or a related group of content, hovering a cursor for greater than a threshold period over a group of content or a related group of content, and/or pausing scrolling for greater than a threshold period through groups of content whilst a group of content or a related group of content is displayed on a user interface downloading content that is in a group of content or related group of content, having watched at least part of content that is in a group of content or related group of content, bookmarking content that is in a group of content or related group of content; browsing content that is in a group of content or related group of content, recording content that is in a group of content or related group of content, adding content that is in a group of content or related group of content to virtual shopping basket or otherwise selecting for purchase or potential purchase, watching or listening to a trailer for content that is in a group of content or related group of content, playing content that is in a group of content or related group of content on a user device, purchasing content that is in a group of content or related group of content, clicking on or otherwise selecting content that is in a group of content or related group of content from a list of search results, remotely recording content that is in a group of content or related group of content, setting a reminder for content that is in a group of content or related group of content, liking, making a favorite or otherwise adding to a list content that is in a group of content or related group of content, disliking content that is in a group of content or related group of content, messaging about content that is in a group of content or related group of content, posting on social media about content that is in a group of content or related group of content, playing purchased content that is in a group of content or related group of content, stopping watching or playing content that is in a group of content or related group of content, and/or rating content that is in a group of content or related group of content (Gordon; monitoring at least interaction data, including watches, saves, likes, skips, shares, partial viewing, etc.; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97, and Ellis; based on a user frequently accessing, i.e. previous interaction(s), certain content/channels which are associated with certain channel group; page 11, paragraph 106, and user can also designate, i.e. a previous interaction, a favorite; page 11, paragraph 106).
Regarding claim 4, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the related group of content is a group of content having the same or a related theme or comprising at least one content item in common (Gordon; related groups/feeds can contain duplicate, i.e. common, item(s) as the removal is optional; pages 6-7, paragraph 59).
Regarding claim 5, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the ordering of the groups of content for presentation to the user on the user interface comprises ranking the groups in order of expected preference of the user (Gordon; feed/group items can be organized, i.e. ranked, based on criteria; page 5, paragraph 49, including user configuration, i.e. preferences; page 4, paragraph 35, and user likes, i.e. expected preference; page 8, paragraph 72, and Ellis; based on a user frequently accessing, i.e. previous interaction(s), certain content/channels which are associated with certain channel group, system can rank/order the channel group such that it appears prominently displayed in a certain area, i.e. first such that it is anticipated to be accessed; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710, and element 701, and Fig. 9, elements 950, and user can also designate, i.e. a previous interaction, a favorite channel group such that it will be rank/ordered and appear prominently displayed in a certain area, i.e. first; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710).
Regarding claim 7, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the ordering groups of content for presentation to the user on the user interface for a user comprises ordering at least one or some groups of content for which there have been a higher number of previous interactions by that user for display preferentially to at least one or some other groups of content for which there have been a lower number of previous interactions by that user (Gordon; can sort some of the groups/feeds based on a criteria, while other ones may not be sorted, or may be sorted by different criteria, i.e. preferential for organizing over others; pages 7-8, paragraph 67, and wherein criteria can be based on likes, shares, views, i.e. higher previous interaction; page 8, paragraph 72, and page 10, paragraph 97, and amount(s) of user action(s); page 12, paragraph 107, and/or possibly lower previous interaction(s) such as skipping and deleting; page 10, paragraph 97, and Ellis; based on a user frequently accessing, i.e. previous interaction(s) with a higher number than others; page 11, paragraph 106).
Regarding claim 8, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses at least one of: presenting the groups of content to the user on the user interface in the determined order based at least in part on the user activity, and/or providing an indication of the ordered groups of content on an interface for generating content selection interfaces (Gordon; displaying the groups/feeds in the interface; Fig. 8A and Fig. 9, and wherein again can be rearranged/organized based on the interaction data; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97, and Ellis; displaying the ranked/ordered groups; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710, and element 701, and Fig. 9, elements 950).
Regarding claim 9, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses fixing a place of one or more groups of content in an ordering of groups of content in the content selection interface and placing at least one or each other of the groups of content in the content selection interface based at least in part on the user activity (Gordon; feed(s)/group(s) can be displayed in a set order, and/or can be displayed in order based on user interactions; page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and wherein can include configuration as to what feeds/groups appear in what areas; page 12, paragraph 108, and page 17, paragraph 129, and Ellis; can be ranked/ordered such that certain groups are shown in a particular area, i.e. first, with the other then being shown after; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710, and element 701, and Fig. 9, elements 950).
Regarding claim 10, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses implementation as part of a content selection interface configuration tool (Gordon; with configuration interface; page 12, paragraph 108, and page 13, paragraph 112), and comprises:
selecting, using the user interface configuration tool, the one or more groups of content whose place in the ordering of groups of content is to be fixed, and/or selecting, using the user interface configuration tool, the at least one or each other of the groups of content that are to be placed in the ordering of groups of content based at least in part on the user activity (Gordon; feed(s)/group(s) can be displayed in a set order, and/or can be displayed in order based on user interactions; page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and wherein can include configuration as to what feeds/groups appear in what areas; page 12, paragraph 108, and page 17, paragraph 129, and again with configuration interface; page 12, paragraph 108, and page 13, paragraph 112).
Regarding claim 12, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the user interface is a user interface of an electronic program guide, EPG (Gordon; displaying the groups/feeds in an interface; Fig. 8A and Fig. 9, and Ellis; with interactive programming guide; page 2, paragraph 37), and the method is performed in conjunction with a method of providing television content or other content to each of a plurality of users using a content distribution system (Gordon; with content from content distributor(s); page 16, paragraph 125, and transmitting the content; page 18, paragraph 132, and page 19, paragraph 137, and can also include television content; page 2, paragraph 8), wherein
a user device of each user displays the EPG that is operable by the user of the user device to select one or more items of television or other content (Gordon; displaying the groups/feeds in an interface; Fig. 8A and Fig. 9, and wherein selection of content for playback; page 9, paragraph 77, and Ellis; selection of channel/content can allow for access to and display of video relating to that channel/content; page 11, paragraph 109, and page 12, paragraph 114, and page 14, paragraphs 127 and 133); and
in response to the selections a content distribution system distributes the selected items of television content or other content to the user devices for viewing by the users during content viewing sessions (Gordon; selection of content for playback/display; page 9, paragraph 77, and again from content distributor(s); page 16, paragraph 125, and transmitting the content; page 18, paragraph 132, and page 19, paragraph 137, and can also include television content; page 2, paragraph 8, and Ellis; selection of channel/content can allow for access to and display of video relating to that channel/content; page 11, paragraph 109, and page 12, paragraph 114, and page 14, paragraphs 127 and 133, and wherein based on access from service provider(s); page 2, paragraph 37).
Regarding claim 13, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the user interface is configured to allow scrolling through different carousels (Gordon; scrolling through the carousels; page 2, paragraph 10), and scrolling through content within individual carousels (Gordon; scrolling through the feeds in carousels; page 2, paragraph 10), and the ordering of the carousels is based at least in part on the user activity (Gordon; rearranged/organized based on interaction data; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97).
Regarding claim 14, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses ordering groups of content for presentation to the user on the user interface comprises determining a personalized ordering the groups of content for presentation to that user on the content selection interface of a user device of that user based at least in part on the user activity of that user (Gordon; rearranged/organized based on interaction data; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97, and specifically for a user, i.e. personalized, based on their interactions; page 10, paragraph 97, and Ellis; based on a user frequently accessing, i.e. previous interaction(s) specific to user, certain content/channels which are associated with certain channel group, system can rank/order the channel group such that it appears prominently displayed in a certain area, i.e. first; page 11, paragraph 106, and Fig. 7, elements 710, and element 701, and Fig. 9, elements 950).
Regarding claim 15, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the ordering of the groups of content for presentation to the user on the user interface is based on data of a content distribution system or middleware operator and does not comprise 3rd party data (Gordon; based on content and related interactions with feeds items; page 10, paragraph 97, and wherein from content distributors, i.e. content distribution system, and not comprising third party data; page 16, paragraph 125).
Regarding claim 16, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses at least one or each group is a group in which content in the group is related by a common theme, or at least one or each group is a group selected by a user (Gordon; can be a common theme/genre; page 14, paragraph 115, and/or selected for inclusion by user; page 4, paragraph 35, and page 13, paragraph 111, and Ellis; channels grouped based on shared/common characteristics; page 1, paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 17, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the ordering groups of content for presentation to the user on the content selection interface based at least in part on the user activity of that user and additional context data (Gordon; rearranged/organized based on interaction data; page 7, paragraph 67, and page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and page 10, paragraph 97, and wherein can also including at least time, date, device, location, etc. i.e. context information; page 3, paragraph 31, and page 14, paragraph 115).
Regarding claim 18, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses the content of the ordered groups of content are selectable by the user in the content selection interface to present the selected content (Gordon; selection of content for playback; page 9, paragraph 77, and Ellis; selection of channel/content can allow for access to and display of video relating to that channel/content; page 11, paragraph 109, and page 12, paragraph 114, and page 14, paragraphs 127 and 133).
Claim 19, which discloses a system, is analyzed with respect to the citations and/or rationale provided in the rejection of similar claim 1. The following additional limitations are also disclosed:
processing circuitry (Gordon; with at least processor(s); page 18, paragraph 132, and page 22, paragraph 156, and circuits; page 21, paragraph 153, and page 22, paragraph 155).
Claim 20, which discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium, is analyzed with respect to the citations and/or rationale provided in the rejection of similar claim 1. The following additional limitations are also disclosed:
a non-transitory computer-readable medium that comprises computer-readable instructions (Gordon; with tangible storage device containing executable instructions; page 22, paragraphs 155-157).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al., US 2012/0278725 in view of Ellis, US 2007/0157248 and further in view of Martino et al., US 6,662,177.
Regarding claim 6, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 5.
Gordon in view of Ellis does not explicitly disclose applying a machine learning model to user activity, the machine learning model being configured to output the expected preference of the user based on the user activity.
In a related art, Martino does disclose applying a machine learning model to user activity, the machine learning model being configured to output the expected preference of the user based on the user activity (utilizing machine learning models for inferring user preference for content based on user interactions/patterns, and utilizing these preferences for determining and providing content, i.e. output based on the preference(s); see abstract, and col. 3, lines 16-23, and col. 4, lines 12-17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the prior art of Gordon, Ellis, and Martino, by allowing machine learning to be utilized for determining certain user preferences, in order to provide an improved system and method for the search, retrieval, and organization of data from large data spaces such as electronic program guides (Martino; col. 1, lines 7-10).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gordon et al., US 2012/0278725 in view of Ellis, US 2007/0157248 and further in view of Lahdesmaki, US 2004/0233239.
Regarding claim 11, Gordon in view of Ellis discloses all the claimed limitations of claim 10, as well as the method comprises one or both of: selecting, using the content selection interface configuration tool, elements to be fixed, wherein fixing an element comprises fixing the places of all of the plurality of groups of content in that element in the ordering of groups, and/or selecting, using the user interface configuration tool, elements that are personalizable, wherein the places of all of the plurality of groups of content in a personalizable element are to be placed in the ordering of groups of content based at least in part on the user activity (Gordon; with configuration interface; page 12, paragraph 108, and page 13, paragraph 112, and wherein feed(s)/group(s) can be displayed in a set order, and/or can be displayed in order based on user interactions; page 8, paragraphs 68-72, and wherein can include configuration as to what feeds/groups appear in what areas; page 12, paragraph 108, and page 17, paragraph 129).
Gordon in view of Ellis does not explicitly disclose groups of content are arranged or arrangeable into folders, each folder comprising a plurality of groups of content; and
the folders.
In a related art, Lahdesmaki does disclose groups of content are arranged or arrangeable into folders, each folder comprising a plurality of groups of content (content can be arranged into folders, i.e. grouped into folders, with each folder also having a plurality of subfolders, i.e. additional groups, each linked to the previous folder; page 1, paragraph 7, and page 2, paragraph 26, and Fig. 2A);
the folders (page 1, paragraph 7, and page 2, paragraph 26, and Fig. 2A); and
elements to be fixed (page 4, paragraph 47, and Fig. 2E, element 258).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the prior art of Gordon, Ellis, and Lahdesmaki by allowing the groups/feeds already present in Gordon in view of Ellis to be utilized in folder type arrangements, in order to provide an improved system and method which allows users to organize increasing numbers of media types with more functionality without substantially increasing the complexity of the user interface (Lahdesmaki; page 1, paragraph 5).
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RANDY A FLYNN whose telephone number is (571)270-5680. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 6:00am - 3:00pm ET.
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.
/RANDY A FLYNN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424