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 determining, during output of the at least the first portion of the content item from the first buffer, that at least an additional portion of the content item is required to perform the at least one trick play operation.
However, Mathews et al disclose a system being capable of making determination to retrieve additional content from the remote buffer during trick play when the local buffer is almost empty as disclosed in para.0056-0057. This action is made non-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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hassler(US.Pub.No.20200037008) in view of Mathews(US.Pub.No.20130160044).
Regarding claim 1, Hassler et al disclose a method comprising: receiving, by a computing device and from a network, at least a first portion of a content item(see fig.1 to fig.5 for allowing user device 102a to receive portion of video content from an external network; 0004-0005);
storing the at least the first portion of the content item to a first buffer in a first storage, wherein the first storage is located on the computing device(see fig.1 to fig.5 for allowing the system to store portion of video content in a local buffer located at the user device; 0004;0033-0034;0067-0068);
based on user-initiation of at least one trick play operation, causing output of the at least the first portion of the content item from the first buffer(see fig.1 to fig.5 for allowing users to input trick play function or operation in order to retrieve portion of video content from the local buffer; 0067; 0087;0108;0132);
receiving at least the additional portion of the content item from a second buffer in a second storage located remotely from the computing device; and causing output of the received additional portion of the content item(See fig.1 to fig.5 for allowing the system can resume playback of portion of video content from a remote buffer; 0061-0062;0114;0003;0105;0114;0087).
But did not explicitly disclose determining, during output of the at least the first portion of the content item from the first buffer, that at least an additional portion of the content item is required to perform the at least one trick play operation.
However, Mathews et al disclose determining, during output of the at least the first portion of the content item from the first buffer, that at least an additional portion of the content item is required to perform the at least one trick play operation(the system is able to make determination to retrieve additional content from the remote buffer during trick play when the local buffer is almost empty; 0056-0057).
It would have been obvious for any person of ordinary skill in the art at that time the invention was filed to incorporate the teaching of Mathews to modify Hassler by providing options to make determination to retrieve additional portions of the media contents from a remote buffer during trick play resulting in “determining, during output of the at least the first portion of the content item from the first buffer, that at least an additional portion of the content item is required to perform the at least one trick play operation” for the purpose of improving viewing experiences accordingly.
Regarding claim 2, Hassler et al disclose wherein the first buffer comprises a time-shift buffer (TSB)( a local time shift buffer of a user device, abstract; 0033-0034; 0108-0109); and the second buffer comprises a cloud-based TSB(a remote, or cloud-based, pause buffer, e.g., a remote, or cloud-based, time shift buffer (cTSB),0003;0056;0121).
Regarding claim 3, it is rejected using the ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Hassler et al disclose wherein the first storage comprises a volatile storage(see fig.2 with element 203(RAM); 0031).
Regarding claim 5, Hassler et al disclose wherein the second storage is located on the network(see fig.1 to fig.2 with second storage or buffer located remotely or in the network; 0025; 0003;0034).
Regarding claim 6, Hassler et al disclose wherein the computing device comprises one or more of a set- top box, a television, a display device, a computer, a smartphone, a laptop, a tablet, a multimedia playback device, or a portable electronic device(see fig.1 to fig.2 having devices as TV, set top box and mobile device for displaying video contents; 0019; 0028).
Regarding claim 7, Hassler et al disclose wherein the at least one trick play operation comprises one or more of a pause operation, a rewind operation, a fast-forward operation, a skip-forward operation, a skip-back operation, or a return-to-live-point operation(a particular user device sends a request to pause or rewind one of the content streams,0003-0004; thumbnail images may also be used when the user performs other trick play operations, such as fast forward,0067;0061).
Regarding claim 8, Hassler et al disclose wherein the content item comprises a linear content item(See fig.1 to fig.2 for allowing users to broadcast or live video contents from providers or external sources; 0091;0089).
Regarding claim 9, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 2.
Regarding claim 11, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 4.
Regarding claim 12, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 6.
Regarding claim 13, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 7.
Regarding claim 14, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 8.
Regarding claim 15, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 4.
Regarding claim 18, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 6.
Regarding claim 19, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 7.
Regarding claim 20, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 8.
Conclusion
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