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
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed 12/4/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amended the claims to recite “wherein the live video stream decoded and played by using the first video player in the normal playback mode is same as the live video stream decoded and played by using the second video player in the abnormal playback mode”. The Examiner notes that this claim amendment is broad and does not specifically define how the video stream decoded and played by both video players are the same. The Examiner notes that under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the video stream played by two video players came be the same based on the size of the windows of the two players, the same device playing the video stream or the video players representing live broadcast channels (ESPN and CNN). Therefore, the rejection stands.
The Examiner recognizes that Paragraph 0034 of the specification of the instant application teaches playing “the live video” in a foreground window (the first video player) and a background window (the second video player), however, while antecedence to “the live video” is continuous throughout this paragraph, this portion of the instant application fails to require that the actual content in the foreground and background window is “the same” content (e.g. two players playing the same CNN live video). Therefore, the Examiner notes that the specification fails to teach Applicant’s suggestion that the actual content in the first and second video players be the same content. The rejection has been updated below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 8-10 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sammarco (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0143791).
Referring to claim 1, Sammarco discloses that in response to detecting that a user enters a live room playback page, pulling a live video stream corresponding to a live room from a preset livestreaming server (see Paragraphs 0017 and 0031 for the user opening a user interface that displays multiple moving picture thumbnails of live broadcast/real-time streams (see step 630 in Figure 6)).
Sammarco also discloses creating a first video player and a second video player (see Figure 3 for creating four video players on the display device), setting an attribute of the first video player to a normal playback mode, and setting an attribute of the second video player to an abnormal playback mode, wherein the abnormal playback mode is that the second video player silently plays in background (see Paragraphs 0025 and Paragraph 0028).
Sammarco also discloses decoding and playing the live video stream by using the first video player in the normal playback mode, and decoding and playing the live video stream by using the second video player in the abnormal playback mode, wherein the live video stream decoded and played by using the first video player in the normal playback mode is same as the live video stream decoded and played by using the second video player in the abnormal playback mode (see Figure 2 for the display device having a decoder 250 or 220, Figure 3 for displaying the four video players and Paragraphs 0025, 0028-0029 and the Examiner’s rebuttal above).
Sammarco also discloses that in response to detecting a live room playback page exit instruction triggered by the user, destroying the first video player, and decoding and playing the live video stream by using the second video player in a floating window mode and the normal playback mode (see Figures 4-5 and Paragraph 0026 for selecting a second video player to display a larger floating window display of the ESPN channel, wherein the other three video players are removed/destroyed).
Referring to claim 2, Sammarco also discloses that the decoding and playing the live video stream by using the second video player in the abnormal playback mode comprises decoding the live video stream in the background by using the second video player, and silently playing a decoded live picture by using a preset frame rate (see Figure 2 for the display device having a decoder 250 or 220, Figure 3 for displaying the four video players and Paragraphs 0025, 0028 and 0029 and further note that the real-time data stream is a broadcast television signal (see Paragraph 0015) which are inherently transmitted and presented using a preset frame rate).
Referring to claim 3, Sammarco also discloses that in response to detecting the live room playback page exit instruction triggered by the user, destroying the first video player, and decoding and playing the live video stream by using the second video player in the floating window mode and the normal playback mode comprises:
in response to detecting the live room playback page exit instruction triggered by the user, destroying the first video player, and creating a floating window by using an operating system and decoding the live video stream by using the second video player, and playing the decoded live picture in the normal playback mode in the floating window (see Figure 2 for the display device including an operating system and further note Figures 4-5 and Paragraph 0026 for selecting a second video player to display a larger floating window display of the ESPN channel, wherein the other three video players are removed/destroyed).
Referring to claims 8-10, see the rejection of claims 1-3, respectively.
Referring to claims 15-17, see the rejection of claims 1-3, respectively.
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, 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 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammarco (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0143791).
Referring to claims 7 and 14, Sammarco discloses that a second video player is an AVplayer (see Figure 2 for application 222), but fails to teach that the first video player is an ijkplayer.
The Examiner takes Official Notice that an ijkplayer is well known in the art and predates the filing date of the instant application.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify the second video player, as taught by Sammarco, using an ijkplayer, for the purpose of allowing a user to play FFmpeg video files.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 11-13 and 18-20 are 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 the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 JASON P SALCE whose telephone number is (571)272-7301. The examiner can normally be reached 5:30am-10:00pm M-F (Flex Schedule).
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 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 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.
/Jason Salce/Senior Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Jason P Salce
Senior Examiner
Art Unit 2421
February 2, 2026