DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice as to Grounds of Rejection and Pre-AIA or AIA Status
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Allowable Subject Matter
Each of claims 5, 8, 15 and 20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of its base claim and any intervening claims set forth in this action and if rewritten to overcome all the objection(s) and/or rejection(s) set forth below in this action.
Claim Objections
Claims 7, 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: These claims recite the term "and/or", which is selective language, the examiner suggests using either the "and" term or the "or" term, otherwise the claims should be worded in a clearer fashion to claim both terms. For the purpose of this examination the examiner is selecting the "or" term from this selective language. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 13, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 13, 18 recite “… the selection of the first media item,…” selection” and “first media item” lack antecedent basis. It is not clear which selection step or first media item is being referred to? Examiner has interpreted to be “a selection of a first media item” for the purpose of examination.
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, 6-7, 9, 11-14, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kizelshteyn et al (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0311982 A1 hereinafter Kizelshteyn) in view of Price (US Patent Application Publication 2018/0336645 A1 hereinafter Price).
With regard to claims 1, 11, 16, Kizelshteyn teaches a method, a computer system, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, respectively, comprising:
while a first user is participating in a shared playback session that includes the first user and a plurality of users other than the first user <history of media items consumed with social contacts can be shared para 0005-0007>, receiving a request, from the first user, for a set of recommended media items <user can request to create a playlist fig 1 para 0023-0024>;
in response to receiving the request:
retrieving a plurality of probabilistic data structures for the plurality of users other than the first user, each probabilistic data structure indicating a playback history of a respective user of the plurality of users other than the first use < based upon user’s taste profile, history of media consumed by users of social contact is retrieved para 0006-0007, 0071-0073>; and
providing, for display in a user interface, the set of recommended media items, wherein the set of recommended media items comprises a subset of the first set of media items selected based on the playback histories of the plurality of users other than the first user as indicated by the plurality of probabilistic data structures < subset of media items is presented based upon play back history para 0069, 0095 see figs 1, 2 and associated para>.
one or more processors (claims 11, 16) <fig 2 item 206>; and
memory storing one or more programs (claims 11, 16) <fig 2 item 208>;
Kizelshteyn does not appear to explicitly disclose retrieving a first set of media items from a playback history of the first user;
In the same field of endeavor, Price teaches
retrieving a first set of media items from a playback history of the first user < in a content sharing platform media item of a user that is recently watched is retrieved para 0045>;
Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Kizelshteyn, Price before him/her before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Kizelshteyn to include the teachings of Price, in order to obtain limitations taught by Price. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because it enhances recommendation of pertinent media to a user.
With regard to claims 2, 12, 17, these claims depend upon claims 1, 11, 16 respectively, which are rejected above. In addition, Kizelshteyn teaches wherein the shared playback session includes a shared playback queue <playback queue is generated para 0005>.
With regard to claims 3, 13, 18, these claims depend upon claims 2, 12, 17 respectively, which are rejected above. In addition, Kizelshteyn teaches wherein:
prior to receiving, from the first user, the selection of the first media item, the shared playback queue includes a plurality of media items <playlist retrieves media for playback para 0067>; and
the subset of the first set of media items is selected further based on the plurality of media items included in the shared playback queue <subset of playback is generated para 0006>.
With regard to claims 4, 14, 19, these claims depend upon claims 2, 12, 17 respectively, which are rejected above. In addition, Kizelshteyn teaches the method further comprising:
receiving, from the first user, selection of a first media item from the set of recommended media items <user can play the playlist para 0028, 0040>; and
in response to the selection of the first media item, adding the first media item to the shared playback queue <subset of playback is generated para 0006>.
With regard to claim 6, this claim depends upon claim 1, which is rejected above. In addition, Kizelshteyn teaches the method further comprising:
ordering the first set of media items based on a plurality of factors <playlist can be ordered alphabetically, randomly, see fig 6 para 01116>; and
selecting the subset of the first set of media items based on the order <media content can be selected see fig 7 para 0118>.
With regard to claim 7, this claim depends upon claim 6, which is rejected above. In addition, Kizelshteyn teaches wherein the ordering is based on relevancy of respective media items in the first set of media items to:
the plurality of media items in the shared playback queue <similarity score for the playback can be used para 0007>;
a number of times the first user has consumed respective media items; and/or
the playback histories of the plurality of users other than the first user as indicated by the probabilistic data structures.
With regard to claim 9, this claim depends upon claim 1, which is rejected above. In addition, Kizelshteyn teaches wherein the subset of the first set of media items is selected further based on a number of times the first user has consumed respective media items <number of times a media has been played can be tracked see fig 89 para 0125>.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kizelshteyn in view of Price in view of Gibson (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0369948 A1 hereinafter Gibson).
With regard to claim 10, this claim depends upon claim 1, which is rejected above. Kizelshteyn, Price do not appear to explicitly disclose limitations of this claim.
In the same field of endeavor, Gibson teaches wherein each probabilistic data structure comprises a Bloom filter or a Cuckoo filter <Bloom filter can be used para 0026>.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Kizelshteyn, Price, Gibson before him/her before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Kizelshteyn, Price to include the teachings of Gibson, in order to obtain limitations taught by Gibson. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because it further improves providing relevant media
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANIL K BHARGAVA whose telephone number is (571)270-3278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at 571-272-4140. 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.
/ANIL K BHARGAVA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172