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
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all pending claims have been fully considered, but they are moot because of the new ground of rejection. Applicant argues that cited references failed to disclose identifying, using a primary data probe and a plurality of respective secondary data probes, respective primary splice points in the multicast video feed and respective destination splice points in the plurality of destination video feeds; identifying first and second offset values between the primary splice points and the destination splice points based on a comparison of primary and secondary video samples; and providing the first offset value to a video transcoder and the second offset value to a secondary content source simultaneously or near-simultaneously to adjust the original splicing information.
However, Killick et al disclose a system that is able to use information or data probe for identifying splice points for appropriate transitions from primary content to secondary or alternate content; and the system is able to compare data for adjusting splice points associated with the video contents. The system is able to provide the first offset value to the SPE 202 and the transcoder 204; and the system is able to provide the second offset value to the secondary source 116. And the system is able to provide the first and the second offset values simultaneously or near simultaneously, and finally, the system can adjust splicing information; col.9, lines 16-25+; abstract; col.10, lines 47-55+; col.11, lines 14-20+; col.7, lines 48-67. This action is made final.
Claims rejections-35 U.S.C. 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.
Claim(s) 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over , Stockhammer(US.Pub.No.20190238950) in view of Loheide(US.Pub.No.20180192093) and Killick(US.Pat.No.11736781).
Regarding claim 11, Stockhammer et al disclose a method comprising: receiving a multicast video feed(see fig.1 to fig.9 for receiving live broadcast from contents sources; 0046-0048) , wherein the multicast video feed is processed by a video transcoder(see fig.1 to fig.9 for using encoders to transform video contents; 0073;0049-0051) from original video content into the multicast video feed including primary content(see fig.1 to fig.9 with primary content server 262; 0185) and original splicing information(the system is able to embed splicing data in the main video stream; 0190;0029-0031) comprising splice points configured to direct placement of secondary content into the multicast video feed(see fig.1 to fig.9 with server 254 representing secondary content server; 0185), and wherein the multicast video comprises a plurality of destination video feeds(see fig.1 to fig.9 for distributing contents from different sources or servers; 0072).
But did not explicitly disclose retrieving advertisement schedule data from an advertisement schedule repository accessible over a network; and using the advertisement schedule data to calculate original splicing information for insertion into the multicast video feed; identifying, using a primary data probe and a plurality of respective secondary data probes, respective primary splice points in the multicast video feed and respective destination splice points in the plurality of destination video feeds; identifying first and second offset values between the primary splice points and the destination splice points based on a comparison of primary and secondary video samples; and providing the first offset value to a video transcoder and the second offset value to a secondary content source simultaneously or near-simultaneously to adjust the original splicing information.
However, Loheide et al disclose retrieving advertisement schedule data from an advertisement schedule repository accessible over a network; and using the advertisement schedule data to calculate original splicing information for insertion into the multicast video feed(see fig.1a to fig.6 with spot scheduler 108 for providing information related to schedule time associated with commercials and the system is able to determine or calculate insertion points of commercials based on received data from spot scheduler 108 and playout schedule 130; 0025; 0038; 0034-0035;0064; 0024;0044; 0069;0019).
It would have been obvious before effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Loheide to modify Stockhammer by introducing spot scheduler 108 and playout schedule 130 of Loheide to the system of Stockhammerresulting in “ retrieving advertisement schedule data from an advertisement schedule repository accessible over a network; and using the advertisement schedule data to calculate original splicing information for insertion into the multicast video feed” for the purpose of improving the capability of the network accordingly.
And Killick et al disclose identifying, using a primary data probe and a plurality of respective secondary data probes, respective primary splice points in the multicast video feed and respective destination splice points in the plurality of destination video feeds(the system is able to use information or data probe for identifying splice points for appropriate transitions from primary content to secondary or alternate content; abstract) ; identifying first and second offset values between the primary splice points and the destination splice points based on a comparison of primary and secondary video samples(the system is able to compare data for adjusting splice points associated with the video contents; col.7, lines 48-67)and providing the first offset value to a video transcoder(the system is able to provide the first offset value to the SPE 202 and the transcoder 204; col.10, lines 47-55+; col.11, lines 14-20+) and the second offset value to a secondary content source(the system is able to provide the second offset value to the secondary source 116, col.10, lines 47-55+; col.11, lines 14-20+) simultaneously or near-simultaneously(the system is able to provide the first and the second offset values simultaneously or near simultaneously, col.9, lines 16-25+)to adjust the original splicing information(the system can adjust splicing information; col.9, lines 16-25+; abstract).
It would have been obvious before effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Killick to modify Stockhammer and Loheide by introducing first offset value and second offset value of Killick to the system of Stockhammer and Loheide resulting in “identifying, using a primary data probe and a plurality of respective secondary data probes, respective primary splice points in the multicast video feed and respective destination splice points in the plurality of destination video feeds; identifying first and second offset values between the primary splice points and the destination splice points based on a comparison of primary and secondary video samples; and providing the first offset value to a video transcoder and the second offset value to a secondary content source simultaneously or near simultaneously to adjust the original splicing information” for the purpose of limiting delay during transmission of data across the network accordingly.
Regarding claim 12, Stockhammer et al disclose further comprising: identifying respective splice points in the multicast video feed using a primary data probe(the system is to identify insertion point; 0190-0191); recording primary video samples comprising frames of primary content data corresponding to the respective splice points within the multicast video feed(see fig. to fig.9 for providing frames of video samples;0089;0097; 0099) ; identifying respective destination splice points within the plurality of destination video feeds using a plurality of respective secondary data probes(0190-0191); recording secondary video samples comprising selected frames of the plurality of destination video feeds corresponding to the destination splice points(0099; 0059); identifying an offset value(the system provides offset value associated with presentation time; 0101; 0109; 0112;0150) between the primary splice points and the destination splice points based on a comparison of the primary video sample and the secondary video sample(the system is able to compare data; 0068); and adjusting the original splicing information with the offset value(the system can adjust the playout timing; 0123;0138;0179).
Regarding claim 13, Stockhammer et al disclose wherein the offset value is an average of test values for differences between the primary splice points and the destination splice points(the system uses presentation time offset to adjust playout timing;0138; 0179).
Regarding claim 14, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 11.
Regarding claim 15, Stockhammer et al disclose wherein the splicing information comprises timing information(the system provides timestamps associated with frames of video contents;0049; 0050;0012).
Regarding claim 16, Stockhammer et al disclose wherein the splicing information comprises a splicing message, the splicing message comprising a timestamp for the splice point where the secondary content is inserted into the primary content(0049; 0050;0012).
Regarding claim 17, Stockhammer et al disclose further comprising: obtaining a plurality of manifest files from a content delivery network(the system provides manifest files containing information related to schedule time of video contents; 0060; 0062; 0066;0068), wherein the manifest files correspond to destination video feeds and list destination splice point data with records of the secondary content provided within the destination video feeds(see fig. to fig.9 for providing frames of video samples;0089;0097; 0099); and comparing the advertisement schedule data with the records of the secondary content provided with the destination video feeds(the system can compare data to find match; 0005;0120; 0068).
But did not explicitly disclose identifying, using a content management interface module (CMI) the splice point data from the manifest files.
However, Loheide et al disclose identifying, using a content management interface module (CMI) the splice point data from the manifest files(The system uses the broadcast inventory management such as BIMAMCS 110 for identifying splicing points based on playout schedule 130; 0039;0021).
It would have been obvious before effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Loheide to modify Stockhammer and Killick by introducing the broadcast inventory management of Loheide to the system of Stockhammer resulting in “ identifying, using a content management interface module (CMI) the splice point data from the manifest files” for the purpose of improving the capability of the network accordingly.
Regarding claim 18, Stockhammer et al disclose wherein the CMI utilizes a manifest DASH analysis to confirm that scheduled advertisements were accurately placed within the destination video feeds(the system provides manifest DASH; the manifest file may be a DASH MPD,0254).
Regarding claim 19, Stockhammer et al disclose further comprising displaying, by a user interface multiple streams of video data provisioned to multiple market zones for determining respective differences between original splicing information and destination splicing information(the system can use demographic location for inserting or splicing specific supplemental contents to users; 0020;0005;0191).
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 JEAN D SAINT CYR whose telephone number is (571)270-3224. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 5712727527. 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.
/JEAN D SAINT CYR/Examiner, Art Unit 2425
/Brian T Pendleton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights