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 .
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 Office Action is in response to an AMENDMENT entered 4/27/2026
Status of Claims
Claims 5, 10 and 15 are canceled. Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-14 and 16-23 are pending.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-14, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20220053245 A1 to Guez in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20190089996 A1 to Surcouf and in further view of US Pub. No. 20200327586 A1 to Miller.
As to claims 1, 11 and 20, Guez discloses a device for outputting a video stream comprising:
circuitry configured to: receive one or more video streams of a real life event (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0033-0037, 0056-0057, 0063-0064, 0076-0077, receiving broadcast video e.g. live sporting event);
select one of the one or more video streams (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0033-0037, 0056-0057, 0063-0064, 0076-0077, inputting the broadcast video for processing the frames and video of broadcast video);
automatically generate an annotation for the selected one video stream based upon the content of the selected video stream (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0021, 0033-0037, 0056-0057, 0063-0064, 0077-0079, automatically generating augments reality video overlay layers including textual and/or graphical statistics data and game enhancers for the inputted broadcast video based on the visual analysis engine of the broadcast video); and
output the annotation with the selected one of the one or more video streams (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0033-0037, 0056-0057, 0063-0064, 0079-0080, providing the augmented reality video overlay layers with the inputted broadcast video to viewing devices for display).
Guez does not expressly disclose wherein the annotation comprises an audible annotation for playback with the selected one of the one or more video streams, wherein the circuitry is configured to construct the audible annotation from predefined phrases and at least one metric associated with the real life event,
wherein the at least one metric comprises to one or more of: a metric derived from social media posts associated with the real life event; a rating derived from social media posts of one or more attendees of the real life event; and/or a rating from one or more viewers of the real life event.
Surcouf discloses wherein the annotation comprises an audible annotation for playback with the selected one of the one or more video streams (Surcouf ¶0045, audio effects),
wherein the circuitry is configured to construct the audible annotation from predefined phrases and at least one metric associated with the real life event (Surcouf ¶0045, audio effects e.g. booing when opposing team scores, cheering when favorite race car driver passes another driver or takes the lead).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Guez by wherein the annotation comprises an audible annotation for playback with the selected one of the one or more video streams, wherein the circuitry is configured to construct the audible annotation from predefined phrases and at least one metric associated with the real life event as disclosed by Surcouf. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to provide audio effects associated with scoring events and/or exciting portions in the live video thereby enhancing the user’s experience.
Guez and Surcouf do not expressly disclose wherein the at least one metric comprises to one or more of: a metric derived from social media posts associated with the real life event; a rating derived from social media posts of one or more attendees of the real life event; and/or a rating from one or more viewers of the real life event.
Miller discloses wherein the at least one metric comprises to one or more of: a metric derived from social media posts associated with the real life event; a rating derived from social media posts of one or more attendees of the real life event; and/or a rating from one or more viewers of the real life event (Miller ¶0024, 0049, 0054-0057, user inputting/selecting rating of a player participating in the sporting event).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Guez and Surcouf by wherein the at least one metric relates to one or more of: social media posts associated with the real life event; a rating from one or more attendees of the real life event; and/or a rating from one or more viewers of the real life event as disclosed by Miller. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to provide results using a plurality user’s rating of players in the sporting event thereby enhancing the user’s experience.
As to claims 2 and 12, Guez discloses wherein the annotation comprises a graphic overlaid on a one or more consecutive video frames in the selected one of the one or more video streams (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0042-0049, 0078, graphical overlay on the broadcast video).
As to claims 3 and 13, Guez discloses wherein the annotation is output separately to the selected one of the one or more video streams (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0011, 0013, the overlay layer is transmitted separately from the broadcast video).
As to claims 4 and 14, Guez discloses wherein the annotation is textual and inserted into an associated metadata stream (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0011, 0013, 0017, 0041, 0058, overlay layer including text and overlay layers include metadata and transmitted separately from the broadcast video).
As to claim 6, Miller discloses wherein the annotation is based upon a metric associated with the real life event (Miller ¶0024, 0049, 0054-0057, user inputting/selecting rating of a player participating in the sporting event)
As to claims 7 and 17, Guez discloses wherein the real life event comprises a sporting event (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0042-0049, 0078, player names, player statistics, team statistics, game statistics for sporting event).
As to claims 8 and 18, Guez discloses wherein the annotation is a graphic pertaining to a player in the sporting event, and the circuity is configured to insert the graphic adjacent the player in the sporting event (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0042-0043, 0049, 0058, 0078, 0080, player names, player statistics, team statistics and/or game statistics overlaid next to the player in the sporting event).
As to claims 9 and 19, Guez discloses wherein the graphic pertains to a player’s performance during the sporting event (Guez Fig. 1-8, ¶0042-0043, 0049, 0058, 0078, 0080, player names, player statistics, team statistics and/or game statistics overlaid next to the player in the sporting event).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20220053245 A1 to Guez in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20190089996 A1 to Surcouf in further view of US Pub. No. 20200327586 A1 to Miller and in further view of US Pub. No. 20170064240 A1 to Mangat
As to claim 16, Guez, Surcouf and Miller do not expressly disclose wherein the annotation is based upon a rating metric associated with a participant in the real life event.
Mangat discloses wherein the annotation is based upon a rating metric associated with a participant in the real life event (Mangat Fig. 6, ¶0042, 0090, a “hotness” rating for each player on the field depending upon their current positional data, their game stats, and/or their performance in similar historical situations, as well as any other relevant metrics, and highlight players whose inferred “hotness” exceeds a certain threshold as being notable players, a user may select one of the indicated player representations 603 in order to review information specific to that particular player, including, for example their current speed, numerical hotness value, and/or likelihood of being targeted or otherwise playing an important role in an upcoming play).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Guez, Surcouf and Miller by wherein the annotation is based upon a rating metric associated with a participant in the real life event as disclosed by Mangat. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to provide various player information for display while viewing the video thereby enhancing the user’s experience.
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20220053245 A1 to Guez in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20190089996 A1 to Surcouf in further view of US Pub. No. 20200327586 A1 to Miller and in further view US Pub. No. 20100094531 A1 to MacLeod.
As to claims 21-23, Guez, Surcouf and Miller do not expressly disclose wherein the circuitry is configured to construct the audible annotation from pre-recorded phrases spoken by a commentator.
MacLeod discloses wherein the circuitry is configured to construct the audible annotation from pre-recorded phrases spoken by a commentator (MacLeod ¶0030, 0032-0033, creating the audio clips from pre-recorded audio files containing phrases spoke in the voice of an announcer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Guez, Surcouf and Miller by wherein the circuitry is configured to construct the audible annotation from pre-recorded phrases spoken by a commentator as disclosed by MacLeod. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to provide customized audio/voice of pre-recorded phrases spoken in the voice of various announcers thereby enhancing the user’s experience.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/27/2026 related to claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-14 and 16-23have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In reference to Applicant's arguments:
It is respectfully submitted that Guez in view of Surcouf and in further view of Miller fails to teach, suggest or fairly disclose the combination of features of claim 1 as amended including and without limitation the features of circuitry configured to construct an audible annotation from predefined phrases and at least one metric associated with a real life event, wherein the at least one metric comprises to one or more of a metric derived from social media posts associated with the real life event, a rating derived from social media posts of one or more attendees of the real life event, and/or a rating from one or more viewers of the real life event.
It is respectfully submitted that neither Guez nor Surcouf nor nor Miller Mangat nor their combination teach, suggest or fairly disclose the combination of features 1, 11, and 20 including and without limitation the features of the construction of an audible annotation from predefined phrases and at least one metric associated with a real life event, wherein the at least one metric comprises to one or more of a metric derived from social media posts associated with the real life event, a rating derived from social media posts of one or more attendees of the real life event, and/or a rating from one or more viewers of the real life event.
Applicant thus respectfully submits that Guez in view of Surcouf in further view of Miller and together with Mangat fails to disclose the combination of features of claims 1, 11, and 20 as amended, and that there are substantial differences between the claimed invention and the disclosure of Guez in view of Surcouf in further view of Miller and together with Mangat.
The references fail to teach all elements of claims 1, 11, and 20 as amended and there are substantial differences between claims 1, 11, and 20 as amended and the subject matter of Guez in view of Surcouf in further view of Miller and together with Mangat. For at least the above reasons, applicant respectfully traverses the §103 rejections of the claims as set out in the Office Action.
Accordingly, applicant respectfully submits that claims 1, 11, and 20 as amended, are neither anticipated by, nor obvious in view of Guez in view of Surcouf in further view of Miller and together with Mangat.
Examiners Response:
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Guez, Surcouf and Miller in combination do disclose wherein the annotation comprises an audible annotation for playback with the selected one of the one or more video streams, wherein the circuitry is configured to construct the audible annotation from predefined phrases and at least one metric associated with the real life event, wherein the at least one metric comprises to one or more of: a metric derived from social media posts associated with the real life event; a rating derived from social media posts of one or more attendees of the real life event; and/or a rating from one or more viewers of the real life event.
In particular, Surcouf discloses audio effects e.g. booing when opposing team scores, cheering when favorite race car driver passes another driver or takes the lead (Surcouf ¶0045). Although Miller does not disclose a metric derived from social media posts associated with the real life event; a rating derived from social media posts of one or more attendees of the real life event, Miller does disclose a user inputting/selecting rating of a player participating in the sporting event (Miller ¶0024, 0049, 0054-0057). Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the examiner respectfully disagree.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, 11-14 and 16-23 have been rejected.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYU CHAE whose telephone number is (571)270-5696. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00am -4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NASSER MOAZZAMI can be reached on 571-272-4195. 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.
/KYU CHAE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights