Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argues that the rejection should be withdrawn because “Benya's Look Back Gating Is Based on Negotiated Programming Rights, Not on Whether a Beginning Portion of the Media Content Is Available for Delivery Via a Content Source Other Than the Linear Broadcast Source”. To this matter the examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim calls for “while the media content is caused to be played from the particular timepoint based on the request, determine whether to permit playing of the media content from the beginning timepoint, wherein the determining comprises determining whether a beginning portion of the media content corresponding to the beginning timepoint is available for delivery via a content source other than the linear broadcast source”. This limitation is clearly taught by the combination of Benya and the newly cited reference to Oz as cited below. Although, Benya teaches that the look back feature can be obtained from any channel also that the streams can be fed directly to the STB or from the cache memory. Benya does not spells out that the delivery is made via a content source other than the linear broadcast source. If the applicant would like to claim this so called “run time, content specific availability check” then all the limitations differentiating from the Benya and Oz reference should be included in the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 22, 25-29, 32 and 35-39 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Benya in view of Oz et al., US 8,185,926.
Regarding claims 22 and 32, Benya discloses a computer-implemented system, comprising: computer memory; control circuitry configured to:
receive a request, from a user, to access media content that is in-progress via a linear broadcast source, wherein a user profile of the user is stored in the computer memory (figures 10-12, paragraph 11 and 74-86);
based on receiving the request, cause the media content to be played, via the linear broadcast source, from a particular timepoint of the media content that is after a beginning timepoint of the media content (figures 10-12, paragraph 74-86);
while the media content is caused to be played from the particular timepoint based on the request, determine whether to permit playing of the media content from the beginning timepoint, wherein the determining comprises determining whether a beginning portion of the media content corresponding to the beginning timepoint is available for delivery via a content source other than the linear broadcast source (figures 10-12, paragraph 74-86);
based at least in part on determining to permit playing of the media content from the beginning timepoint, provide for display an indication that the media content is capable of being played from the beginning timepoint of the media content (figures 10-11, paragraph 74-86);
receive input requesting to access the beginning timepoint of the media content (figures 10-12, paragraph 74-86);
based on receiving the input, receive, via a content source other that the linear broadcast source, the media content (paragraph 69 and 74-86); and
cause the media content to be played, via the content source other than the linear broadcast source, from the beginning timepoint of the media content instead of the particular timepoint of the media content (figures 10-12, paragraph 74-86).
Although, Benya teaches that the look back feature can be obtain from any channel also that the streams can be fed directly to the STB or from the cache memory. Benya is silent about delivering the content via a content source other than the linear broadcast source.
In an analogous art, OZ discloses delivering the content via a content source other than the linear broadcast source (figures 4, col. 9, line 35 to col. 10 line 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Benya’s system with the teachings of Oz. The motivation would have been to serve the media from a closer location for the benefit of avoiding delays.
Regarding claims 25 and 35, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 32, wherein the control circuitry is further configured to determine whether to permit playing of the media content from the beginning timepoint of the media content by determining that a portion of the media content corresponding to the beginning timepoint of the media content has finished being downloaded (Benya paragraph 73).
Regarding claims 26 and 36, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 32, wherein the control circuitry is further configured to:
prior to receiving the request to access the media content and playing the media content from the particular timepoint based on the received request, store a portion of the media content corresponding to the beginning timepoint of the media content in the computer memory comprising a buffer memory or a cache memory (Benya paragraph 34 and 51);
wherein determining whether to permit playing of the media content from the beginning timepoint of the media content is further based at least in part on determining that the portion of the media content corresponding to the beginning timepoint of the media content is stored in the buffer memory or the cache memory (Benya paragraph 34 and 51).
Regarding claims 27 and 37, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 36, wherein the control circuitry is further configured to:
identify viewing preferences of the user (Benya paragraph 11, 34 and 51); and
store the portion of the media content corresponding to the beginning timepoint of the media content in the buffer memory or the cache memory based at least in part on determining that one or more attributes of the viewing preferences of the user match one or more preferences of the media content (Benya paragraph 11, 34 and 51).
Regarding claims 28 and 38, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 36, wherein:
the request to access the media content is received while different media content is being accessed (Benya figures 10-11, paragraph 74-86); and
the control circuitry is further configured to, based on the different media content having been accessed within a threshold period of time from when the media content is accessed, store in the cache memory or the buffer memory one or more portions of the different media content occurring while the media content is being accessed (Benya figures 10-11, paragraph 74-86).
Regarding claims 29 and 39, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 32, wherein receiving the input comprises receiving selection of the indication that the media content is capable of being played from the beginning timepoint of the media content (Benya figures 10-11, paragraph 74-86).
Claims 31 and 41 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Benya in view of Oz in view of Kaminski et al., US 2003/0121055.
Regarding claims 31 and 41, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 32.
Benya and Oz are silent about based at least in part on determining to permit playing of the media content from the beginning timepoint, provide an option to record the media content.
In an analogous art, Kaminski discloses based at least in part on determining to permit playing of the media content from the beginning timepoint, provide an option to record the media content (paragraph 76).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Benya and Oz’s system with the teachings of Kaminski. This is standard in the art. The motivation would have been to give the user a copy of the content for the benefit of providing the desired media.
Claims 30, 40 and 44-45 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Benya in view of Oz in view of Berry et al., US 2013/0216207.
Regarding claims 30 and 40, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 32.
Benya and Oz are silent about determine that one or more portions of the media content, occurring after the beginning timepoint of the media content, are not yet available for playing; and provide for display an indication of an amount of time remaining until each portion of the media content prior to the particular timepoint will be available for playing.
In an analogous art, Berry discloses determine that one or more portions of the media content, occurring after the beginning timepoint of the media content, are not yet available for playing; and provide for display an indication of an amount of time remaining until each portion of the media content prior to the particular timepoint will be available for playing (figure 11, paragraph 106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Benya and Oz’s system with the teachings of Berry. The motivation would have been to provide a more informative interface for the benefit of providing quality of service.
Regarding claims 44 and 45, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 32.
Benya and Oz are silent about prior to providing for display the indication that the media content is capable of being played from the beginning timepoint of the media content, provide for display an interim indication that the media content is not yet capable of being played from the beginning timepoint of the media content.
In an analogous art, Berry discloses prior to providing for display the indication that the media content is capable of being played from the beginning timepoint of the media content, provide for display an interim indication that the media content is not yet capable of being played from the beginning timepoint of the media content (figure 11, paragraph 106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Benya and Oz’s system with the teachings of Berry. The motivation would have been to provide a more informative interface for the benefit of providing quality of service.
Claims 42-43 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Benya in view of Oz in view of Li et al., US 2007/0101012.
Regarding claims 42 and 43, Benya and Oz disclose the system of claim 32.
Benya and Oz are silent about receive the media content via a switched multicast stream.
In an analogous art, Li discloses receive the media content via a switched multicast stream (figure 1, paragraph 11-16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Benya and Oz’s system with the teachings of Li. The motivation would have been to save bandwidth for the benefit of alleviating network congestion.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSCHTA I MONTOYA whose telephone number is (571)270-1192. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Flynn can be reached on 571-272-1915. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
OM
Oschta Montoya
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2421
/OSCHTA I MONTOYA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights