DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
The reply filed on 2 December 2025 has been entered. Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application and have been considered below.
Argument:
The applicant argues that the Examiner misunderstands the teachings of Son. Applicants state that Son is directed to media content delivery to a mobile client device in a format automatically selected from alternative versions of the media content based on resource parameters. (Son, Abstract.) Applicants assert that Son teaches pre-selecting one version for delivery and does not teach or suggest "receiving... a first plurality of frames of the media item... having a first resolution," "presenting... the first plurality of frames... on a presentation interface ...," "receiving... a second plurality of frames... having a second resolution, wherein the second plurality of frames is received while at least a portion of the first plurality of frames is being presented," as recited in amended claim 1.
Response:
Our reviewing Court has made clear that examined claims are interpreted as broadly as is reasonable using ordinary and accustomed term meanings so as to be consistent with the Specification. In re Thrift, 298 F.3d 1357, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2002). The Court further has explained that the interpretations are to be made while “taking into account whatever enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be afforded by the written description contained in the applicant’s specification,” In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054 (Fed. Cir. 1997), but without reading limitations from examples given in the Specification into the claims, In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Moreover, there is no ipsissimis verbis test for determining whether a reference discloses a claim element, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 832 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
US Patent Publication 2021 0289317 A1, (Son et al.) shows the limitation the first plurality of frames having a first resolution ("a first few media items for each stack (e.g., the first four items for each stack) are automatically downloaded in the best resolution or quality version available for display. If, instead, prevailing or expected network performance is relatively poor (e.g., displaying below-threshold values for one or more predefined data transmission parameters), lower quality versions of the relevant media content files may initially be downloaded for the first few media items of each of the story stacks, after which higher-quality versions of the relevant media items are downloaded to replace the earlier downloaded lower quality versions," paragraph [0041]).
In addition, previously presented as an additional reference, US Patent 12,088,821 B1, (Waggoner) shows ("content delivery system includes a scaling service that is to scale each fragment of a video file with its own resolution (e.g., frame size) for a (e.g., single) target bitrate, for example, to generate a single video representation having fragments with multiple, different resolutions for the target bitrate," Col. 2, lines 2-7)
Claim Objections
Claim 16 has been amended. The objection to claim 16 is withdrawn.
Claim Interpretation
Under MPEP 2143.03, "All words in a claim must be considered in judging the patentability of that claim against the prior art." In re Wilson, 424 F.2d 1382, 1385, 165 USPQ 494, 496 (CCPA 1970). As a general matter, the grammar and ordinary meaning of terms as understood by one having ordinary skill in the art used in a claim will dictate whether, and to what extent, the language limits the claim scope. Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art. See, e.g., Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc., 582 F.3d 1288, 1298, 92 USPQ2d 1163, 1171 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Claims 5, 11, 15 and 19 recite:
Claim 5, “at least one of: downloading a target part of the second portion of the media item, or completing presentation of a predetermined part of the first portion of the media item.”
Claim 11, “one or more of: a current bandwidth of a network connection between the client device and the media streaming service.”
Claim 15, “the first threshold condition comprises at least one of: downloading a target part of the second portion of the media item, or completing presentation of a predetermined part of the first portion of the media item.”
Claim 19, “at least one of a size of the first portion or a size of the second portion is computed based on one or more system metrics associated with the client device, and wherein the one or more system metrics comprise one or more of: a current bandwidth of a network connection between the client device and the media streaming service.”
Since “at least one of” and “one or more of” are disjunctive, any one of the elements found in the prior art is sufficient to reject the claim. While citations have been provided for completeness and rapid prosecution, only one element is required. Because, on balance, it appears the disjunctive interpretation enjoys the most specification support and for that reason the disjunctive interpretation (one of A, B OR C) is being adopted for the purposes of this Office Action. Applicant’s comments and/or amendments relating to this issue are invited to clarify the claim language and the prosecution history.
Claim Interpretation (Contingent Limitation)
Claims 1, 12 and 20 have been amended. The interpretation of claims 1, 12 and 20 regarding a contingent limitation is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claim 1 has been amended. Claim 1 now states statutory subject matter, The rejection of claims 1-11 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter is withdrawn as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The claims have been re-evaluated for compliance with 35 USC 101. As further explained below, all claims 1-20 are statutory.
Each of the claims fall within at least one statutory category (machine, claims 12-20; process, claims 1-11) thus passing Step 1.
Under Step 2A, Prong One, the amended claims no longer recite abstract ideas, as the claims now recite “presenting, by the processing device and responsive to the occurrence of a first threshold condition, the second plurality of frames of the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device.”
One of ordinary skill in the art in light of the specification would understand that element cannot be realistically be performed by the human mind and is not fairly considered mental processes because a human mind is not capable of presenting an item on the presentation interface. Furthermore, attempting to mentally perform the element would go well beyond using the type of pen-and-paper mental aids that are contemplated and permitted by the MPEP and caselaw as being part of a non-statutory mental process.
1st Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 8-12, 15-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Patent Publication 2021 0289317 A1, (Son et al.).
Claim 1
Regarding Claim 1, Son et al. teach a method ("FIG. 3 is a schematic block diagram of an example embodiment of a media content delivery system 244," paragraph [0073]) comprising:
communicating, by a processing device of a client computing device ("Different types of client devices 210 on which social media functionalities are available via [AltContent: textbox (Son et al. Fig. 2, showing a media content delivery system.)]
PNG
media_image1.png
635
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the system 202 may comprise, but are not limited to, mobile phones, desktop computers, laptops, portable digital assistants (PD As), smart phones, tablets, ultra-books, netbooks, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics," paragraph [0066]), to a media streaming server, a selection of a media item from the client computing device ("in response to a request for media content from a mobile device," paragraph [0023]);
receiving, by the processing device and from the media streaming server ("selection operations are performed by a content delivery server, such as application server 240 in FIG. 2. In such cases, the relevant client application 214 may be configured to gather relevant resource information from the device 210 (e.g., performance history data, current presentation on the device, current network connection information, and the like), and to communicate such information to the application server 240 for facilitating automated content delivery optimization," paragraph [0068]), a first plurality of frames of the media item ("A set of media content files that are to be delivered in association with one another or in a particular replay sequence ( e.g., a set of associated photographs in a slideshow or a set of associated video clips) are in some embodiments available for delivery in different versions, with the different versions having different respective media reproduction properties or replay properties," paragraph [0021] where a set of associated video clips is a plurality of frames), the first plurality of frames having a first resolution ("a first few media items for each stack (e.g., the first four items for each stack) are automatically downloaded in the best resolution or quality version available for display. If, instead, prevailing or expected network performance is relatively poor (e.g., displaying below-threshold values for one or more predefined data transmission parameters), lower quality versions of the relevant media content files may initially be downloaded for the first few media items of each of the story stacks, after which higher-quality versions of the relevant media items are downloaded to replace the earlier downloaded lower quality versions," paragraph [0041]);
presenting, by the processing device the first plurality of frames of the media item on a presentation interface of the client computing device ("some of the pictures are viewable on the target device while other pictures in the stack are still in the process of downloading," paragraph [0021]);
receiving, by the processing device from the media streaming server, a second plurality of frames of the media item, the second plurality of frames having a second resolution, ("method according to one embodiment of the disclosure provides for dynamic adaptation of the format and/or configuration of media content delivery to the mobile phone 210 to provide the interactive GUI 100 and to make the associated media content available for user consumption," paragraph [0035]) wherein the second plurality of frames is received while at least a portion of the first plurality of frames is being presented ("a first few media items for each stack (e.g., the first four items for each stack) are automatically downloaded in the best resolution or quality version available for display. If, instead, prevailing or expected network performance is relatively poor (e.g., displaying below-threshold values for one or more predefined data transmission parameters), lower quality versions of the relevant media content files may initially be downloaded for the first few media items of each of the story stacks, after which higher-quality versions of the relevant media items are downloaded to replace the earlier downloaded lower quality versions," paragraph [0041]); and
detecting an occurrence of a first threshold condition ("comprise selecting lower quality media assets for delivery to client devices on the network and/or at the physical location associated with a recent spike or above-threshold delta in media request volume," paragraph [0029]); and
presenting, by the processing device and responsive to the occurrence of a first threshold condition, the second plurality of frames of the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("In this example, dynamic modification of content delivery format responsive to variations in prevailing and/or predicted resource parameters are employed with respect to a number of different mechanisms for request, delivery, and reproduction of media content," paragraph [0035]).
It is recognized that the citations and evidence provided above are derived from potentially different embodiments of a single reference. Nevertheless, it 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 to employ combinations and sub-combinations of these complementary embodiments, because Son et al. explicitly motivates doing so at least in paragraphs [0015], [0017] and [0116] including “In general, structures and functionality presented as separate resources in the example configurations may be implemented as a combined structure or resource. Similarly, structures and functionality presented as a single resource may be implemented as separate resources. These and other variations, modifications, additions, and improvements fall within a scope of embodiments of the present disclosure.” and otherwise motivating experimentation and optimization.
The rejection of method claim 1 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of system claim 12 and computer readable device claim 20 while noting that the rejection above cites to both device and method disclosures. Claims 12 and 20 are mapped below for clarity of the record and to specify any new limitations not included in claim 1.
Claim 2
Regarding claim 2, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, wherein a combined duration of the first plurality of frames and the second plurality of frames does not exceed 110% of a duration of the media item ("One aspect of such compression optimization includes selecting whether to provide a requested video file in the compression format as uploaded by the submitting user, or whether to generate a differently compressed version for delivery," paragraph [0044] where compression is used to ensure delivery of media does not exceed the media play time).
Claim 5
Regarding claim 5, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, wherein the first threshold condition comprises at least one of: downloading a target part of the second plurality of frames of the media item, or completing presentation of a predetermined part of the first plurality of frames of the media item ("the one or more variable resource parameters may be determined based, at least in part, on historical performance data of the relevant resource (s) corresponding to one or more current attributes applicable to consumption of the requested media content by the mobile device," paragraph [0022] where historical performance data is the same as a target part of the media item or predetermined part of the first portion).
Claim 6
Regarding claim 6, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the media streaming server, a third plurality of frames of the media item, the third plurality of frames having a third resolution, wherein the third resolution is higher than the second resolution ("A set of media content files that are to be delivered in association with one another or in a particular replay sequence ( e.g., a set of associated photographs in a slideshow or a set of associated video clips) are in some embodiments available for delivery in different versions, with the different versions having different respective media reproduction properties or replay properties," paragraph [0021] where a set teaches a third or greater number of files and in different versions teaches higher or lower resolutions); and
presenting, responsive to an occurrence of a second threshold condition, the third plurality of frames of the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("the one or more variable resource parameters may be determined based, at least in part, on historical performance data of the relevant resource (s) corresponding to one or more current attributes applicable to consumption of the requested media content by the mobile device," paragraph [0022] where current attributes teaches a second threshold condition).
Claim 8
Regarding claim 8, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, wherein the media item comprises a video ("A set of media content files that are to be delivered in association with one another or in a particular replay sequence ( e.g., a set of associated photographs in a slideshow or a set of associated video clips)," paragraph [0021]).
Claim 9
Regarding claim 9, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the media streaming server, an indication of a plurality of versions of the media item available to be received by the client computing device ("request module 310 may be configured to receive and interpret user input on the device 210, and to communicate an electronic request message to the relevant media content delivery server," paragraph [0074] where user input teaches a plurality of versions), each of the plurality of versions of the media item having a respective resolution of a plurality of resolutions, wherein the plurality of resolutions comprises the first resolution and the second resolution ("It will be appreciated that the predefined plurality of alternative versions for thumbnail rendering here comprises ( 1) precomposed, low-resolution media content items, (2) precomposed, high-resolution items, (3) non-recomposed, low resolution items, and (4) non-precomposed, high-resolution items," paragraph [0037]), and
communicating a size of the first plurality of frames to the media streaming server("method according to one embodiment of the disclosure provides for dynamic adaptation of the format and/or configuration of media content delivery to the mobile phone 210 to provide the interactive GUI 100 and to make the associated media content available for user consumption," paragraph [0035] where dynamic adaption and/or configuration teaches communicating a set of options that would include size through an interactive GUI).
Claim 10
Regarding claim 10, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, wherein at least one of a size of the first plurality of frames or a size of the second plurality of frames("It will be appreciated that the predefined plurality of alternative versions for thumbnail rendering here comprises ( 1) precomposed, low-resolution media content items, (2) precomposed, high-resolution items, (3) non-recomposed, low resolution items, and (4) non-precomposed, high-resolution items," paragraph [0037]) is computed based on one or more system metrics associated with the client computing device ("historical performance of the mobile phone 210 when it was in a substantially similar physical location. In some instances, a single value may be provided for a single defined geographical location, such as a predefined geographic region ( e.g., a county, precinct, or city)," paragraph [0051] where a location of a phone is a system metric associated with a client device).
Claim 11
Regarding claim 11, Son et al. teach the method of claim 10, wherein the one or more system metrics comprise one or more of: a current bandwidth of a network connection between the client device and the media streaming service ("more finely attuned network connection parameters, such as specific parameters or measurements of the wireless connection (e.g., current Wi-Fi channel, dBm levels, interference measurements, cellular tower identity, signal strength, recent tower migration history, etc.)," paragraph [0055]),
a current throughput of the network connection between the client computing device and the media streaming server("more finely attuned network connection parameters, such as specific parameters or measurements of the wireless connection (e.g., current Wi-Fi channel, dBm levels, interference measurements, cellular tower identity, signal strength, recent tower migration history, etc.)," paragraph [0055]),
a speed of a processing device of the client computing device ("existing device contention for resources (RAM, network, CPU)," paragraph [0059] where CPU resources teaches a speed of a client processing device),
a current utilization of the processing device of the client computing device, or an amount of memory of the client computing device available to support presenting the media item of the presentation interface of the client computing device ("existing device contention for resources (RAM, network, CPU)," paragraph [0059] where CPU resources teaches a speed of a client processing device).
Claim 12
Regarding claim 12, Son et al. teach a system ("FIG. 3 is a schematic block diagram of an example embodiment of a media content delivery system 244," paragraph [0073]) comprising:
a memory device ("through the storage and retrieval of information in memory structures to which the multiple hardware modules have access," paragraph [0089]), and
a processing device communicatively coupled to the memory device ("Different types of client devices 210 on which social media functionalities are available via the system 202 may comprise, but are not limited to, mobile phones, desktop computers, laptops, portable digital assistants (PD As), smart phones, tablets, ultra-books, netbooks, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics," paragraph [0066]), the processing device to:
communicate, to a media streaming server, a selection of a media item from a client computing device ("in response to a request for media content from a mobile device," paragraph [0023]);
receive, from the media streaming server("selection operations are performed by a content delivery server, such as application server 240 in FIG. 2. In such cases, the relevant client application 214 may be configured to gather relevant resource information from the device 210 (e.g., performance history data, current presentation on the device, current network connection information, and the like), and to communicate such information to the application server 240 for facilitating automated content delivery optimization," paragraph [0068]), a first plurality of frames of the media item("A set of media content files that are to be delivered in association with one another or in a particular replay sequence ( e.g., a set of associated photographs in a slideshow or a set of associated video clips) are in some embodiments available for delivery in different versions, with the different versions having different respective media reproduction properties or replay properties," paragraph [0021] where a set of associated video clips is a plurality of frames), the first plurality of frames having a first resolution ("a first few media items for each stack (e.g., the first four items for each stack) are automatically downloaded in the best resolution or quality version available for display. If, instead, prevailing or expected network performance is relatively poor (e.g., displaying below-threshold values for one or more predefined data transmission parameters), lower quality versions of the relevant media content files may initially be downloaded for the first few media items of each of the story stacks, after which higher-quality versions of the relevant media items are downloaded to replace the earlier downloaded lower quality versions," paragraph [0041]);
present, using the first plurality of frames, the media item on a presentation interface of the client computing device ("some of the pictures are viewable on the target device while other pictures in the stack are still in the process of downloading," paragraph [0021]);
receive, from the media streaming server, a second plurality of frames of the media item, the second plurality of frames having a second resolution ("method according to one embodiment of the disclosure provides for dynamic adaptation of the format and/or configuration of media content delivery to the mobile phone 210 to provide the interactive GUI 100 and to make the associated media content available for user consumption," paragraph [0035]), wherein the second plurality of frames is received while at least a portion of the first plurality of frames is being presented("a first few media items for each stack (e.g., the first four items for each stack) are automatically downloaded in the best resolution or quality version available for display. If, instead, prevailing or expected network performance is relatively poor (e.g., displaying below-threshold values for one or more predefined data transmission parameters), lower quality versions of the relevant media content files may initially be downloaded for the first few media items of each of the story stacks, after which higher-quality versions of the relevant media items are downloaded to replace the earlier downloaded lower quality versions," paragraph [0041]);
detect an occurrence of a first threshold condition ("comprise selecting lower quality media assets for delivery to client devices on the network and/or at the physical location associated with a recent spike or above-threshold delta in media request volume," paragraph [0029]); and
present, responsive to the occurrence of a first threshold condition, the second plurality of frames of the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("In this example, dynamic modification of content delivery format responsive to variations in prevailing and/or predicted resource parameters are employed with respect to a number of different mechanisms for request, delivery, and reproduction of media content," paragraph [0035]).
Claim 15
Regarding claim 15, Son et al. teach the system of claim 12, wherein the first threshold condition comprises at least one of:
downloading a target part of the second plurality of frames of the media item, or completing presentation of a predetermined part of the first plurality of frames of the media item ("the one or more variable resource parameters may be determined based, at least in part, on historical performance data of the relevant resource (s) corresponding to one or more current attributes applicable to consumption of the requested media content by the mobile device," paragraph [0022] where historical performance data is the same as a target part of the media item or predetermined part of the first portion).
Claim 16
Regarding claim 16, Son et al. teach the system of claim 12, wherein the processing device is further to: receive, from the media streaming server, a third plurality of frames of the media item, the third plurality of frames having a third resolution, wherein the third resolution is higher than the second resolution ("A set of media content files that are to be delivered in association with one another or in a particular replay sequence ( e.g., a set of associated photographs in a slideshow or a set of associated video clips) are in some embodiments available for delivery in different versions, with the different versions having different respective media reproduction properties or replay properties," paragraph [0021] where a set teaches a third or greater number of files and in different versions teaches higher or lower resolutions); and
present, responsive to an occurrence of a second threshold condition, the third plurality of frames of the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("the one or more variable resource parameters may be determined based, at least in part, on historical performance data of the relevant resource (s) corresponding to one or more current attributes applicable to consumption of the requested media content by the mobile device," paragraph [0022] where current attributes teaches a second threshold condition).
Claim 18
Regarding claim 18, Son et al. teach the system of claim 12, wherein the processing device is further to: receive, from the media streaming server, an indication of a plurality of versions of the media item available to be received by the client device ("request module 310 may be configured to receive and interpret user input on the device 210, and to communicate an electronic request message to the relevant media content delivery server," paragraph [0074] where user input teaches a plurality of versions), each of the plurality of versions of the media item having a respective resolution of a plurality of resolutions, wherein the plurality of resolutions comprises the first resolution and the second resolution ("It will be appreciated that the predefined plurality of alternative versions for thumbnail rendering here comprises ( 1) precomposed, low-resolution media content items, (2) precomposed, high-resolution items, (3) non-recomposed, low resolution items, and (4) non-precomposed, high-resolution items," paragraph [0037]), and
communicate a size of the first plurality of frames to the media streaming server("method according to one embodiment of the disclosure provides for dynamic adaptation of the format and/or configuration of media content delivery to the mobile phone 210 to provide the interactive GUI 100 and to make the associated media content available for user consumption," paragraph [0035] where dynamic adaption and/or configuration teaches communicating a set of options that would include size through an interactive GUI).
Claim 19
Regarding claim 19, Son et al. teach the system of claim 12, wherein at least one of a size of the first plurality of frames or a size of the second plurality of frames is computed based on one or more system metrics associated with the client device, and wherein the one or more system metrics comprise one or more of: a current bandwidth of a network connection between the client computing device and the media streaming server("more finely attuned network connection parameters, such as specific parameters or measurements of the wireless connection (e.g., current Wi-Fi channel, dBm levels, interference measurements, cellular tower identity, signal strength, recent tower migration history, etc.)," paragraph [0055]),
a current throughput of the network connection between the client computing device and the media streaming server("more finely attuned network connection parameters, such as specific parameters or measurements of the wireless connection (e.g., current Wi-Fi channel, dBm levels, interference measurements, cellular tower identity, signal strength, recent tower migration history, etc.)," paragraph [0055]),
a speed of a processing device of the client computing device ("existing device contention for resources (RAM, network, CPU)," paragraph [0059] where CPU resources teaches a speed of a client processing device),
a current utilization of the processing device of the client computing device, or an amount of memory of the client computing device available to support presenting the media item of the presentation interface of the client computing device ("existing device contention for resources (RAM, network, CPU)," paragraph [0059] where CPU resources teaches a speed of a client processing device).
Claim 20
Regarding claim 20, Son et al. teach a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processing device ("FIG. 3 is a schematic block diagram of an example embodiment of a media content delivery system 244," paragraph [0073]), cause the processing device to:
communicate, to a media streaming server, a selection of a media item from a client computing device ("Different types of client devices 210 on which social media functionalities are available via the system 202 may comprise, but are not limited to, mobile phones, desktop computers, laptops, portable digital assistants (PD As), smart phones, tablets, ultra-books, netbooks, multi-processor systems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics," paragraph [0066])
receive, from the media streaming server ("selection operations are performed by a content delivery server, such as application server 240 in FIG. 2. In such cases, the relevant client application 214 may be configured to gather relevant resource information from the device 210 (e.g., performance history data, current presentation on the device, current network connection information, and the like), and to communicate such information to the application server 240 for facilitating automated content delivery optimization," paragraph [0068]), a first plurality of frames of the media item ("A set of media content files that are to be delivered in association with one another or in a particular replay sequence ( e.g., a set of associated photographs in a slideshow or a set of associated video clips) are in some embodiments available for delivery in different versions, with the different versions having different respective media reproduction properties or replay properties," paragraph [0021] where a set of associated video clips is a plurality of frames), the first plurality of frames having a first resolution ("A set of media content files that are to be delivered in association with one another or in a particular replay sequence ( e.g., a set of associated photographs in a slideshow or a set of associated video clips) are in some embodiments available for delivery in different versions, with the different versions having different respective media reproduction properties or replay properties," paragraph [0021]);
present, using the first plurality of frames, the media item on a presentation interface of the client computing device ("some of the pictures are viewable on the target device while other pictures in the stack are still in the process of downloading," paragraph [0021]);
receive, from the media streaming server, a second plurality of frames of the media item, the second plurality of frames having a second resolution ("method according to one embodiment of the disclosure provides for dynamic adaptation of the format and/or configuration of media content delivery to the mobile phone 210 to provide the interactive GUI 100 and to make the associated media content available for user consumption," paragraph [0035]), wherein the second plurality of frames is received while at least a portion of the first plurality of frames is being presented ("a first few media items for each stack (e.g., the first four items for each stack) are automatically downloaded in the best resolution or quality version available for display. If, instead, prevailing or expected network performance is relatively poor (e.g., displaying below-threshold values for one or more predefined data transmission parameters), lower quality versions of the relevant media content files may initially be downloaded for the first few media items of each of the story stacks, after which higher-quality versions of the relevant media items are downloaded to replace the earlier downloaded lower quality versions," paragraph [0041]);
detecting an occurrence of a first threshold condition ("comprise selecting lower quality media assets for delivery to client devices on the network and/or at the physical location associated with a recent spike or above-threshold delta in media request volume," paragraph [0029]); and
present, responsive to an occurrence of the threshold condition, the second plurality of frames of the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("In this example, dynamic modification of content delivery format responsive to variations in prevailing and/or predicted resource parameters are employed with respect to a number of different mechanisms for request, delivery, and reproduction of media content," paragraph [0035]).
2nd Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 3-4, 7, 13-14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Patent Publication 2021 0289317 A1, (Son et al.) in view of US Patent Publication 2020 0126187 A1, (Park et al.).
Claim 3
Regarding Claim 3, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, as noted above.
[AltContent: textbox (Park et al. Fig. 2, showing a super-resolution device.)]
PNG
media_image2.png
356
771
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Son et al. do not explicitly teach all of generating super-resolution.
However, Park et al. teach wherein presenting, using the first plurality of frames, the media item on the presentation interface of the client device comprises: generating a super-resolution version of the first plurality of frames("a third image 145 is obtained by performing AI up-scaling 140," paragraph [0080] where upscaling is super-resolution); and
presenting the super-resolution version of the first plurality of frames on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("Referring to FIG. 28, the terminal 2800 according to embodiments of the disclosure may include a communication interface 2810, a processor 2820, and a memory 2830. However, this is an example, and the terminal 2800 may additionally further include other elements," paragraph [0451]).
Therefore, taking the teachings of Son et al. and Park et al. as a whole, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to modify “Dynamically Adaptive Media Content Delivery” as taught by Son et al. to use “Method and Apparatus for Streaming Data as taught by Park et al. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been that, “As interest in the AI systems increases, many attempts are actively being made to apply the AI systems to various technology fields. For example, research is being conducted to converge the AI systems with technology fields including image processing, data processing, and the like” as noted by the Park et al. disclosure in paragraph [0006], which also motivates combination because the combination would predictably have a higher efficiency as there is a reasonable expectation that the inventions would work together to address bandwidth shortages; and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim 4
Regarding Claim 4, Son et al. teach the method of claim 3, as noted above.
Son et al. do not explicitly teach all of generating super-resolution.
However, Park et al. teach wherein generating the super-resolution version of the first plurality of frames comprises processing the first plurality of frames using an upsampling neural network model ("a third image 145 is obtained by performing AI up-scaling 140," paragraph [0080] where upscaling is super-resolution).
Son et al. and Park et al. are combined as per claim 3.
Claim 7
Regarding Claim 7, Son et al. teach the method of claim 6, as noted above.
Son et al. do not explicitly teach all of generating super-resolution.
However, Park et al. teach wherein presenting, using the second plurality of frames, the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device comprises: generating a super-resolution version of the second plurality of frames("a third image 145 is obtained by performing AI up-scaling 140," paragraph [0080] where upscaling is super-resolution); and
presenting the super-resolution version of the second plurality of frames on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("Referring to FIG. 28, the terminal 2800 according to embodiments of the disclosure may include a communication interface 2810, a processor 2820, and a memory 2830. However, this is an example, and the terminal 2800 may additionally further include other elements," paragraph [0451]).
Son et al. and Park et al. are combined as per claim 3.
Claim 13
Regarding Claim 13, Son et al. teach the system of claim 12, as noted above.
Son et al. do not explicitly teach all of generating super-resolution.
However, Park et al. teach wherein to present, using the first plurality of frames, the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device, the processing device is to: generate a super-resolution version of the first plurality of frames("a third image 145 is obtained by performing AI up-scaling 140," paragraph [0080] where upscaling is super-resolution); and
present the super-resolution version of the first plurality of frames on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("Referring to FIG. 28, the terminal 2800 according to embodiments of the disclosure may include a communication interface 2810, a processor 2820, and a memory 2830. However, this is an example, and the terminal 2800 may additionally further include other elements," paragraph [0451]).
Son et al. and Park et al. are combined as per claim 3.
Claim 14
Regarding Claim 14, Son et al. teach the system of claim 13, as noted above.
Son et al. do not explicitly teach all of generating super-resolution.
However, Park et al. teach wherein to generate the super-resolution version of the first plurality of frames, the processing device is to process the first plurality of frames using an upsampling neural network model ("a third image 145 is obtained by performing AI up-scaling 140," paragraph [0080] where upscaling is super-resolution).
Son et al. and Park et al. are combined as per claim 3.
Claim 17
Regarding Claim 17, Son et al. teach the system of claim 16, as noted above.
Son et al. do not explicitly teach all of generating super-resolution.
However, Park et al. teach wherein to present, using the second plurality of frames, the media item on the presentation interface of the client computing device, the processing device is to: generate a super-resolution version of the second plurality of frames("a third image 145 is obtained by performing AI up-scaling 140," paragraph [0080] where upscaling is super-resolution); and
present the super-resolution version of the second plurality of frames on the presentation interface of the client computing device ("Referring to FIG. 28, the terminal 2800 according to embodiments of the disclosure may include a communication interface 2810, a processor 2820, and a memory 2830. However, this is an example, and the terminal 2800 may additionally further include other elements," paragraph [0451]).
Son et al. and Park et al. are combined as per claim 3.
3rd Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
PNG
media_image3.png
893
588
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 1, 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US Patent Publication 2021 0289317 A1, (Son et al.) in view of US Patent 12,088,821 B1, (Waggoner).
Claim 1
Regarding Claim 1, Son et al. teach the method of claim 1, as noted above.
Son et al. do teach all of a first plurality of frames with a first resolution and a second plurality of frames with a second resolution.
[AltContent: textbox (Son et al. Fig. 4, showing multiple resolutions for fragments (frames) of a file.)]However, Waggoner also teaches the first plurality of frames having a first resolution ("content delivery system includes a scaling service that is to scale each fragment of a video file with its own resolution (e.g., frame size) for a (e.g., single) target bitrate, for example, to generate a single video representation having fragments with multiple, different resolutions for the target bitrate," Col. 2, lines 2-7).
Therefore, taking the teachings of Son et al. and Waggoner as a whole, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to modify “Dynamically Adaptive Media Content Delivery” as taught by Son et al. to use “Dynamic Encoder Time Scaling Service for Live and On-Demand Adaptive Streaming” as taught by Waggoner. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been that, “The specification and drawings are, accordingly, to be regarded in an illustrative rather than a restrictive sense. It will, however, be evident that various modifications and changes may be made thereunto without departing from the broader spirit and scope of the disclosure” as noted by the Waggoner. disclosure in col. 22, lines 47-51, which also motivates combination because the combination would predictably have a higher efficiency as there is a reasonable expectation that bandwidth availability would change during the transmission of a file and would need to be adjusted; and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
The rejection of method claim 1 above applies mutatis mutandis to the corresponding limitations of system claim 12 and computer readable storage medium claim 20 while noting that the rejection above cites to both device and method disclosures.
Reference Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US Patent Publication 2023 0224532 A1 to Stockhammer et al. discloses device for retrieving media data includes a memory configured to store video data; a video decoder configured to decode the video data; and one or more processors implemented in circuitry and configured to: determine that a media presentation includes first video data at a first spatial resolution and second video data at a second spatial resolution, the second spatial resolution being different than the first spatial resolution; receive a first portion of the first video data at the first spatial resolution for a first playback time; send the first portion of the first video data at the first spatial resolution to the video decoder; receive a second portion of the second video data at the second spatial resolution for a second playback time later than the first playback time.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEATH E WELLS whose telephone number is (703)756-4696. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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, Ms. Jennifer Mehmood can be reached on 571-272-2976. 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.
Date: 26 January 2026
/JENNIFER MEHMOOD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2664