DETAILED ACTION
In response to communication filed on 16 April 2026, claims 20, 27-28, 30 and 37-39 are amended. Claims 41-42 are canceled. Claims 20-40 are pending.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 16 April 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see “Rejection Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 103” filed 16 April 2026, have been carefully considered. The arguments are related to newly added claim limitations and are addressed in the rejection below.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 20, 30 and 39 recite “using the media profile”. These claim limitations appear to be citing intended use in terms of what the media profile is used for. Examiner suggests amending the claim to recite the functionality performed by the claimed method, instead of reciting what the claim elements are used for.
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.
Claims 20, 27, 30, 37 and 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall (US 2020/0314125 A1, hereinafter “Hall”) in view of Gates et al. (US 2007/0294311 A1, hereinafter “Gates”) further in view of Yu (US 10,366,076 B1, hereinafter “Yu”) and Saaranen et al. (US 2009/0287794 A1, hereinafter “Saaranen”).
Regarding claim 20, Hall teaches
A method, comprising: (see Hall, [0072] “The method can also include”).
receiving a media file for analysis; (see Hall, [0027] “receive and process predetermined types of atomic components and attachments, for example, depending on the type of file or data they carry”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”).
parsing the media file to separate structural elements of the media file, wherein the structural elements are atomic components… (see Hall, [0071] “parsing the data into one or more atomic components”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”) separated based on byte sequences and… (see Hall, [0072] “The atomic components can be selected from a group comprising… a sequence of bytes of the data”) in the media file, and (see Hall, [0027] “receive and process predetermined types of atomic components and attachments, for example, depending on the type of file or data they carry”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”) wherein the structural elements include… (see Hall, [0071] “parsing the data into one or more atomic components”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”) in the media file; (see Hall, [0027] “receive and process predetermined types of atomic components and attachments, for example, depending on the type of file or data they carry”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”).
parsing the media file to extract metadata of the media file, wherein the metadata includes semantic information specific to… (see Hall, [0027] “The analysis modules 130a-103n are each configured to receive and process predetermined types of atomic components and attachments… some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE), documents (*.DOC, *.PDF), and compressed files (*.zip, *.rar)… Various ones of the analysis modules 130a-130n have specific analysis capabilities that may produce additional metadata”).
… the structural elements and (see Hall, [0071] “parsing the data into one or more atomic components”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”) the metadata of the media file, (see Hall, [0027] “The analysis modules 130a-103n are each configured to receive and process predetermined types of atomic components and attachments… some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE), documents (*.DOC, *.PDF), and compressed files (*.zip, *.rar)… Various ones of the analysis modules 130a-130n have specific analysis capabilities that may produce additional metadata”).
generating,… at least one profile structural signature for the media file that characterizes… (see Hall, [0053] “the analysis modules is configured to parse a predetermined data type, determining, by the analysis module, a signature based on the atomic component”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”) the combination of attributes including an appearance of a structure heading within the media file, (see Hall, [0073] “identify and provide indication of threat level categories of atomic components based on a comparison of determined signatures and predetermined signatures of atomic components and threat level categories associated with atomic components. The atomic components can be selected from a group comprising a message header”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”).
Hall does not explicitly teach the structural elements include structural elements are offsets in the media file, complete binary structures and incomplete binary structures; a type of device that wrote the media file; generating a media profile by compiling the structural elements and the metadata of the media file, wherein the media profile provides an indication of whether the media file has been modified; and generating, using the media profile, at least one profile structural signature for the media file that characterizes a combination of attributes specific to the type of device that wrote the media file; a position of the structure heading within a sequence of a plurality of structure headings within the media file, and a relative depth of the structure heading within a hierarchy of the plurality of structure heading within the media file.
However, Gates discloses managing media contents and also teaches
offsets into the file (see Gates, [0034] “Pages are referenced by their offset values into the file as expressed in short pages”; [0015] “manage media content using any form of machine-readable or computer-readable media, such as on-disk storage, for example. The file allocation scheme may be used to store various types of media content”; [0002] “a media device may need to store an ever-increasing volume of media content from different media sources using multiple files and file types”).
a type of device that wrote the media file, (see Gates, [0021] “Media sources 102-1-n may comprise any physical or logical entity capable of sourcing or delivering media information (e.g., digital video signals, audio signals, and so forth) and/or control information to media processing device 106. Examples of media sources 102-1-n may include a DVD device, a VHS device, a digital VHS device, a personal video recorder (PVR), a digital video recorder (DVR), a computer, a gaming console, a CD player, a digital camera, a digital camcorder, and so forth”; [0024] “type of media suitable for storing information”).
the type of device that wrote the media file,… (see Gates, [0021] “Media sources 102-1-n may comprise any physical or logical entity capable of sourcing or delivering media information (e.g., digital video signals, audio signals, and so forth) and/or control information to media processing device 106. Examples of media sources 102-1-n may include a DVD device, a VHS device, a digital VHS device, a personal video recorder (PVR), a digital video recorder (DVR), a computer, a gaming console, a CD player, a digital camera, a digital camcorder, and so forth”; [0024] “type of media suitable for storing information”) a position of the structure heading within a sequence of a plurality of structure headings within the media file, and (see Gates, [0015] “manage media content… used to store various types of media content received from various media sources into a single uniform file structure”; [0032]-[0035] “A given long page may be partitioned into a number of short pages… short pages are typically at least as long as a file header… the first short page in the file has the reference 0, as does the first long page in the file. The second short page in the file has the reference 1… The first short page in the file typically contains only the file header… The file header contains signatures and versions, page sizes, the page table for the root container and various fields” – there are plurality of short pages and plurality of file headers, the root container has been interpreted as the position) a relative depth of the structure heading within a hierarchy of the plurality of structure headings within the media file (see Gates, [0036] “The root container is a short value containing the highest-level NVPs in the virtual file. A short value may comprise a page table of short pages. Some of the values of those NVPs may be containers themselves, so NVPs may form a hierarchy of arbitrary depth”; [0038] “a NVP_FLAG_TEXT value indicates the NVP has a text name and that the header takes the form of a TextNvpHeader. A NVP_FLAG_CONTAINER value indicates that the NVP value contains more NVPs. A NVP_FLAG_SHORT value indicates the value is actually stored in a page table of short pages and that the value after the header is a PageTable structure”; [0040] “Page tables take the form of a sparse array of data pages. Page tables of short pages are used to store "short" values… arrays are implemented as a hierarchy of fixed length tables in short pages”; [0069] “API layer 804 and API software library 808 may model or support such functions as supporting signatures and versions in the file header for a virtual file, defining and retrieving allocation statistics regarding a virtual file, supporting a hierarchy of NVPs in a virtual file”; [0015] “manage media content… used to store various types of media content received from various media sources into a single uniform file structure”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of offsets, headings associated with signatures, hierarchy of data, devices that generate media data and type of device as being disclosed and taught by Gates, in the system taught by Hall to yield the predictable results of improving file management techniques (see Gates, [0002] “As a result, a media device may need to store an ever-increasing volume of media content from different media sources using multiple files and file types. This may significantly increase file management operations, file structure complexity, and associated costs. Consequently, improved file management techniques may be needed to solve these and other problems”).
The proposed combination of Hall and Gates does not explicitly teach complete binary structures and incomplete binary structures; generating a media profile by compiling the structural elements and the metadata of the media file, wherein the media profile provides an indication of whether the media file has been modified; and generating, using the media profile, at least one profile structural signature for the media file that characterizes a combination of attributes specific to the type of device.
However, Yu discloses fingerprints and teaches
complete binary structures and incomplete binary structures (see Yu, [col 6 lines 6-7] “the first file referencing the corrupted data segment”; [col 16 lines 51-52] “retrieving the non-corrupted data segment from the first location within the instance of the first file… may directly read the non-corrupt instance of the data segment”; [col 9 lines 9-11] “a data segment include, but are not limited to, a portion of a file, a portion of an image, a data block, a portion of a data stream”).
a combination of attributes specific to device type (see Yu, [col 19 lines 28-34] “represents any type or form of infrastructure capable of facilitating communication between one or more components of a computing device… communication infrastructure 612 include, without limitation, a communication bus (such as an Industry Standard Architecture (ISA), Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI), PCI Express (PCIe), or similar bus) and a network”; [col 18 line 28] “calculate the data fingerprint”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of complete and incomplete binary structures and attributes specific to devices as being disclosed and taught by Yu, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall and Gates to yield the predictable results of providing an improved system for repairing corrupted data segments (see Yu, [col 1 lines 32-35] “Accordingly, the instant disclosure identifies and addresses a need for additional and improved systems and methods for repairing corrupted data segments in deduplicated data systems”).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates and Yu does not explicitly teach generating a media profile by compiling the structural elements and the metadata of the media file, wherein the media profile provides an indication of whether the media file has been modified; and using the media profile.
However, Saaranen discloses media profile data and also teaches
generating a media profile by compiling different aspects of media objects (see Saaranen, [0030] “The media profile data 118 may describe a number of aspects of the underlying media objects 116, such as encoding (e.g., codec, version, bitrate, variable/fixed bit rate scheme), digital rights management (e.g., encryption, licenses, permissions), and other metadata (e.g., file extensions, file size, date created/modified/accessed, etc.)”) wherein the media profile provides an indication of whether the media file has been modified; and (see Saaranen, [0030] “The media profile data 118 may describe a number of aspects of the underlying media objects 116, such as encoding (e.g., codec, version, bitrate, variable/fixed bit rate scheme), digital rights management (e.g., encryption, licenses, permissions), and other metadata (e.g., file extensions, file size, date created/modified/accessed, etc.)”).
using the media profile, (see Saaranen, [0030] “The media profile data 118 may describe a number of aspects of the underlying media objects 116, such as encoding (e.g., codec, version, bitrate, variable/fixed bit rate scheme), digital rights management (e.g., encryption, licenses, permissions), and other metadata (e.g., file extensions, file size, date created/modified/accessed, etc.)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of generating media profile that indicates whether media file has been modified as being disclosed and taught by Saaranen, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates and Yu to yield the predictable results of applying improved performance for media profile characterization (see Saaranen, [0008] “Determining media profile identifiers for unknown content may be processor intensive. Such determination may involve guessing a format (e.g., via a file name extension), examining content headers, and/or analyzing samples of the digitized content, using media codecs to resolve images, etc… However, when a large amount of new content is being added to a mobile device (e.g., initial deployment, when the user desires to change hundreds or thousands of media content items) the user experience may significantly suffer if the processing takes too long time. Thus, improving the performance of DLNA media profile characterization in such devices is desirable”).
Claims 30 and 39 incorporate substantively all the limitations of claim 20 in a system (see Hall, [0064]-[0066] “The computer 402 includes a processor 405… the processor 405 can execute instructions and can manipulate data to perform the operations of the computer 402, including operations using algorithms, methods, functions, processes, flows, and procedures… The computer 402 also includes a memory 407 that can hold data for the computer 402 or a combination of components connected to the network 430”) and computer product form (see Hall, [0076] “Each computer program can include one or more modules of computer program instructions encoded on a tangible, non transitory, computer-readable computer-storage medium for execution by, or to control the operation of, data processing apparatus… The computer-storage medium can be a machine-readable storage device, a machine-readable storage substrate, a random or serial access memory device, or a combination of computer-storage mediums”) and are rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 27, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen teaches
wherein the parsing of the media file to separate structural elements of the media file comprises performing a plurality of media byte analyses (see Hall, [0071] “parsing the data into one or more atomic components”; [0072] “The atomic components can be selected from a group comprising a message header, a network address, a domain name, an email address, a message field, a message subject, a message body, a sequence of bytes of the data, a string of characters of the email, and a file attachment”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”).
Claim 37 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 27 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 40, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen teaches
wherein the received media file includes (see Hall, [0027] “receive and process predetermined types of atomic components and attachments, for example, depending on the type of file or data they carry”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”) the hierarchy of the plurality of structure headings (see Gates, [0036] “The root container is a short value containing the highest-level NVPs in the virtual file. A short value may comprise a page table of short pages. Some of the values of those NVPs may be containers themselves, so NVPs may form a hierarchy of arbitrary depth”; [0038] “A NVP_FLAG_CONTAINER value indicates that the NVP value contains more NVPs. A NVP_FLAG_SHORT value indicates the value is actually stored in a page table of short pages and that the value after the header is a PageTable structure”; [0040] “Page tables take the form of a sparse array of data pages. Page tables of short pages are used to store "short" values… arrays are implemented as a hierarchy of fixed length tables in short pages”; [0069] “API layer 804 and API software library 808 may model or support such functions as supporting signatures and versions in the file header for a virtual file, defining and retrieving allocation statistics regarding a virtual file, supporting a hierarchy of NVPs in a virtual file”; [0015] “manage media content… used to store various types of media content received from various media sources into a single uniform file structure”). The motivation for the proposed combination is maintained.
Claims 21, 28, 31 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen in view of McMillan (US 2015/0181269 A1, hereinafter “McMillan”).
Regarding claim 21, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen teaches
… match (see Hall, [0030] “a signature match”) of the generated at least one profile structural signature with a plurality of stored profile structural signatures; and (see Hall, [0053] “comparing, by the analysis module, the determined signature to a collection of predetermined signatures”; [0073] “The analysis module can be further configured to determine signatures based on atomic components and store the signatures in a signature database”; [0030] “a signature may be developed and added to the signature database 142, that is then part of the collection of signatures newly acquired artifacts are checked against”).
providing an indication of at least one of hardware and software corresponding to at least one of the plurality of stored profile structural signatures when at least one of the plurality of stored profile structural signatures… (see Hall, [0030] “reference a signature database 142 to test a component for a signature match… The human analyst 180 may be alerted to the detection of a signature match through an interface presented by the application server 160, an automated alert sent to a monitoring system, or even an email message generated and sent to a designated mailbox for review by the human analyst 180”) with the generated at least one profile structural signature (see Hall, [0053] “comparing, by the analysis module, the determined signature to a collection of predetermined signatures”; [0073] “The analysis module can be further configured to determine signatures based on atomic components and store the signatures in a signature database”; [0030] “a signature may be developed and added to the signature database 142, that is then part of the collection of signatures newly acquired artifacts are checked against”).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen does not explicitly teach determining a percentage match of the generated at least one profile structural signature with a plurality of profile structural signatures; plurality of stored profile structural signatures has a percentage match with the generated at least one profile structural signature that satisfies a predetermined value.
However, McMillan discloses signature generator and also teaches
determining a percentage match of the received signatures with the reference signatures (see McMillan, [0059] “The signature comparator 216 may identify a match based on, for example, whether a threshold number and/or percentage of the received signatures match the reference signatures”).
has a percentage match of the received signatures with the reference signatures that satisfies a predetermined value of a threshold number (see McMillan, [0059] “The signature comparator 216 may identify a match based on, for example, whether a threshold number and/or percentage of the received signatures match the reference signatures”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of percent match between signatures and metadata information as being disclosed and taught by McMillan, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen to yield the predictable results of increasing the efficiency of identifying the data wherein matching signatures can be identified (see McMillan, [0072] “To increase the efficiency of identifying the channel on which the media corresponding to the non-matching reference signatures was presented, the example signature comparator 216 compares the portions of the reference signatures to the signatures collected at the same time prior to comparing other reference signatures to the collected signatures”).
Claim 31 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 21 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 28, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen teaches
wherein the performing of the plurality of media byte analyses includes: (see Hall, [0071] “parsing the data into one or more atomic components”; [0072] “analyzing the collection of data records, identifying, based on the analyzing, a statistical trend within the collection of data records, identifying, based on the analyzing, a selected type of predetermined signatures… The atomic components can be selected from a group comprising a message header, a network address, a domain name, an email address, a message field, a message subject, a message body, a sequence of bytes of the data, a string of characters of the email, and a file attachment”).
parsing structural elements contained in the media file; and (see Hall, [0071] “parsing the data into one or more atomic components”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”).
… the media file (see Hall, [0071] “parsing the data into one or more atomic components”; [0027] “some types of analysis modules may be configured to parse various types of attachments, such as text (*.TXT), binary (*.JPG, *.GIF, *.PNG, *.EXE)”; [0057] “The information can include digital data, visual data, audio information, or a combination of information”).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen does not explicitly teach parsing semantic metadata contained in the media file.
However, McMillan discloses signature generator and also teaches
parsing semantic metadata contained in data stream (see McMillan, [0041] “extract metadata from a data stream”; [0020] “generate media presentation data”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of metadata information as being disclosed and taught by McMillan, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen to yield the predictable results of increasing the efficiency of identifying the data wherein matching signatures can be identified (see McMillan, [0072] “To increase the efficiency of identifying the channel on which the media corresponding to the non-matching reference signatures was presented, the example signature comparator 216 compares the portions of the reference signatures to the signatures collected at the same time prior to comparing other reference signatures to the collected signatures”).
Claim 38 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 28 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 22, 29 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen in view of Base et al. (US 2016/0294561 A1, hereinafter “Base”).
Regarding claim 22, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen teaches
wherein: the generated at least one profile structural signature… (see Hall, [0053] “the analysis modules is configured to parse a predetermined data type, determining, by the analysis module, a signature based on the atomic component”).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen does not explicitly teach signature includes at least a first structural signature and a second structural signature; wherein: the first structural signature includes a first grouping of data structures; and the second structural signature includes a second grouping of data structures, the second grouping including a greater number of data structures than the first grouping.
However, Base discloses digitally signing a file that contains hierarchically structured data objects and also teaches
signature includes at least a first structural signature and a second structural signature (see Base, [0052] “signature data objects SIG are generated at file level, as shown in FIG. 4. The multiple signing involves multiple signature data objects SIG1, SIG2”).
the first structural signature includes a first grouping of data structures; and the second structural signature includes a second grouping of data structures, the second grouping including a greater number of data structures than the first grouping (see Base, [0011] “a reference list that contains references to signature data objects that there are already within the file”; [0063] “that signature data object that has the longest reference list VL is selected and its reference list is extended with the identifier of the generated signature data object as reference”; [0052] “the original file D comprises two data objects on the topmost hierarchy level or file level, namely the file object MOOV, in which the metadata of the presentation are situated, and the file object MDAT, which contains the actual media data or useful data… signature data objects SIG are generated at file level, as shown in FIG. 4. The multiple signing involves multiple signature data objects SIG1, SIG2”; Fig. 1 – top most layer with ftyp, moov and mdat has been interpreted as first grouping and the top most layer along with mvhd and trak has been interpreted as second grouping).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of plurality of signatures and grouping them as being disclosed and taught by Base, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen to yield the predictable results of using digital signatures to establish the authenticity of electronically transmitted messages (see Base, [0003] “Digital signatures are used to establish the authenticity of electronically transmitted messages or electronic files or documents. By checking the digital signature, it is possible to establish whether these messages or files have been altered”).
Claim 32 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 22 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 29, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen teaches
… the generated at least one profile structural signature; (see Hall, [0053] “the analysis modules is configured to parse a predetermined data type, determining, by the analysis module, a signature based on the atomic component”) (see Hall, [0053] “the analysis modules is configured to parse a predetermined data type, determining, by the analysis module, a signature based on the atomic component”).
performing one or more modification byte analysis test (see Hall, [0024] “the hash value of the original incoming message can be compared to any other form or copy of the message to determine bit for bit sameness”).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen does not explicitly teach performing one or more validation tests based on the generated at least one profile structural signature.
However, Base discloses digitally signing a file that contains hierarchically structured data objects and also teaches
performing one or more validation tests based on signature (see Base, [0049] “If the computed value matches the comparison value, then the digital signature of the file is recognized as valid”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of plurality of performing tests on the signature as being disclosed and taught by Base, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu and Saaranen to yield the predictable results of using digital signatures to establish the authenticity of electronically transmitted messages (see Base, [0003] “Digital signatures are used to establish the authenticity of electronically transmitted messages or electronic files or documents. By checking the digital signature, it is possible to establish whether these messages or files have been altered”).
Claims 23 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall, Gates, Yu, Saaranen and Base further in view of Itoh et al. (US 2009/0225463 A1, hereinafter “Itoh”).
Regarding claim 23, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu, Saaranen and Base teaches
wherein: the second grouping includes at least one trak structure for… (see Base, Fig. 1 – top most layer with ftyp, moov and mdat has been interpreted as first grouping that does not include trak and the top most layer along with mvhd and trak has been interpreted as second grouping that includes trak).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu, Saaranen and Base does not explicitly teach at least one trak structure for MP4, MOV, 3G2, 3GP, and M4V files.
However, Itoh discloses reading of media files and also teaches
MP4, MOV, 3G2, 3GP, and M4V files (see Itoh, [0029] “extensions such as mpg/mpeg, vob, mp4, m4v, m4a, wmv, asf/asx, mov, rm/ram, 3gp, 3g2, flv, mqv or wvx”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of plurality of media files as being disclosed and taught by Itoh, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu, Saaranen and Base to yield the predictable results of effectively processing media files (see Itoh, [0042] “When it is determined that the data block is not filled, the data block transfer portion 161 hands over the processing to the file reading portion 155, and then, the file reading portion 155 implements the NtReadFile function to thereby read the media file out of the HDD 23 using the method according to the present embodiment”).
Claim 33 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 23 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 24 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall, Gates. Yu, Saaranen and McMillan in view of Base et al. (US 2016/0294561 A1, hereinafter “Base”).
Regarding claim 24, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu, Saaranen and McMillan teaches
determining a classification… (see Hall, [0029] “The atomic components and attachments, along with their classification information, are sent by the analysis modules”) the generated at least one profile structural signature (see Hall, [0053] “the analysis modules is configured to parse a predetermined data type, determining, by the analysis module, a signature based on the atomic component”) with respect to the plurality of stored profile structural signatures (see Hall, [0007] “to determine signatures based on atomic components and store the signatures in a signature database”; [0030] “a signature may be developed and added to the signature database 142, that is then part of the collection of signatures newly acquired”).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu, Saaranen and McMillan does not explicitly teach classification of data structures and semantic metadata contained in the generated at least one profile structural signature.
However, Base discloses digitally signing a file that contains hierarchically structured data objects and also teaches
classification of data structures and semantic metadata contained in signature (see Base, Fig. 1; [0052] “the original file D comprises two data objects on the topmost hierarchy level or file level, namely the file object MOOV, in which the metadata of the presentation are situated, and the file object MDAT, which contains the actual media data or useful data… signature data objects SIG are generated at file level, as shown in FIG. 4. The multiple signing involves multiple signature data objects SIG1, SIG2”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of classifying information as being disclosed and taught by Base, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates. Yu, Saaranen and McMillan to yield the predictable results of using digital signatures to establish the authenticity of electronically transmitted messages (see Base, [0003] “Digital signatures are used to establish the authenticity of electronically transmitted messages or electronic files or documents. By checking the digital signature, it is possible to establish whether these messages or files have been altered”).
Claim 34 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 24 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 25-26 and 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall, Gates. Yu, Saaranen and McMillan further in view of Wallace et al. (US 2020/0013420 A1, hereinafter “Wallace”).
Regarding claim 25, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates. Yu, Saaranen and McMillan teaches
… the generated at least one profile structural signature… (see Hall, [0053] “the analysis modules is configured to parse a predetermined data type, determining, by the analysis module, a signature based on the atomic component”).
wherein at the step of determining a percentage match,… (see McMillan, [0059] “The signature comparator 216 may identify a match based on, for example, whether a threshold number and/or percentage of the received signatures match the reference signatures”) signature is compared to (see McMillan, [0072] “the example signature comparator 216 compares the portions of the reference signatures to the signatures collected at the same time prior to comparing other reference signatures to the collected signatures”) the plurality of stored profile structural signatures (see Hall, [0007] “to determine signatures based on atomic components and store the signatures in a signature database”; [0030] “a signature may be developed and added to the signature database 142, that is then part of the collection of signatures newly acquired”).
The proposed combination of Hall, Gates. Yu, Saaranen and McMillan does not explicitly teach
normalizing signature (see Wallace, [0055] “this normalization process may remove DC offset information… such that resulting normalized energy signatures are generated”).
the normalized profile structural signature (see Wallace, [0055] “this normalization process may remove DC offset information… such that resulting normalized energy signatures are generated”).
However, Wallace discloses generating correlation values based on signatures and also teaches
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functionality of normalizing and storing signature information as being disclosed and taught by Wallace, in the system taught by the proposed combination of Hall, Gates. Yu, Saaranen and McMillan to yield the predictable results of effectively filtering information based on normalized data (see Wallace, [0007] “filtering the first energy signature into a filtered first energy signature and normalizing the first energy signature based on the filtered first energy signature; filtering the second energy signature into a filtered second energy signature and normalizing the second energy signature based on the filtered second energy signature; and storing the normalized first energy signature and storing the normalized second energy signature in the at least one buffer”).
Claim 35 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 25 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 26, the proposed combination of Hall, Gates, Yu, Saaranen, McMillan and Wallace teaches
storing the normalized profile structural signature in buffers (see Wallace, [0055] “These normalized energy signatures may be stored in corresponding first and second buffers”) the database (see Hall, [0007] “to determine signatures based on atomic components and store the signatures in a signature database”; [0030] “a signature may be developed and added to the signature database 142, that is then part of the collection of signatures newly acquired”). The motivation for the proposed combination is maintained.
Claim 36 incorporates substantively all the limitations of claim 26 in a system form and is rejected under the same rationale.
Citation Of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent No. US 10,162,956 B1 (Truong et al.) teaches media files and profiles. However, the profiles are related to user accounts and not related to media files.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAISHALI SHAH whose telephone number is (571)272-8532. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (7:30 AM to 4:00 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, AJAY BHATIA can be reached at (571)272-3906. 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.
/VAISHALI SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156
Prosecution Insights