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 . This action is made final.
Claims 1-9 and 16-26 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 16, and 25 are independent claims. Claims 10-15 have been canceled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-8 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites “wherein the object identifier comprises a cover”. However, parent claim 4 recites “obtaining a cover of the object identifier” and parent claim 5 details “wherein the cover includes at least a part of the sample media content”. It is thus unclear whether “a cover” as claimed in claim 6 refers to the same cover or a different cover from the “cover” of its parent claims. For the sake of compact prosecution, the Examiner interprets “a cover” in claim 6 as a different cover, such as an initial cover.
Dependent claims 7 and 8 are also rejected due to inheriting the deficiencies of claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 16-22, 25, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Glass et al. (US 2013/0304605 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Glass teaches a method of interface, on a side of a first user (FIG. 1A, [0039], and [0044-0045], FIG. 1B and [0046-0047]: a side of a first user represented by computing device 108), comprising:
displaying an associated interface of the first user, wherein the associated interface includes an object identifier corresponding to at least one object created by the first user, the first user is an author of the at least one object, and the at least one object is configured to create a media content (step 310 of FIG. 3, FIG. 11 and [0070]: as seen in FIG. 11, an associated interface is displayed, including an object identifier, like “Upload from social media site”, “Upload from phone”, or “Take a picture”, corresponding to at least one object, or photo. For example, a first user created and is an author of the object, such as a photo taken on their phone, which is used to create a media content); and
in response to triggering for an object identifier, displaying an attribute setting interface of an object of the at least one object corresponding to the object identifier (step 310 of FIG. 3 and [0070], FIG. 19 and [0072-0075]: triggering for an object identifier corresponds to selection of an object identifier such as “Upload from phone” for photo selection. In response to such a selection, an attribute setting interface as seen in FIG. 19 is displayed.).
Regarding claim 2, Glass further teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein in response to the triggering for the object identifier, displaying the attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier comprises:
in response to first triggering for the object identifier, displaying a first attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier, wherein the first attribute setting interface includes a capturing interface, and the capturing interface is associated with object information of the object (step 310 of FIG. 3 and [0070], FIG. 19 and [0072-0075]: a first attribute setting interface includes a capturing interface as seen in FIG. 19. The capturing interface is associated with object information of the object as the capturing interface adds additional information for the custom gift card).
Regarding claim 3, Glass further teaches the method according to claim 2, further comprising:
obtaining an image based on the capturing interface, and generating a sample media content of the object by using the object information of the object and the image (step 310 of FIG. 3 and [0070], FIG. 19 and [0072-0075]: an image is obtained based on the capturing interface and a sample media content/teaser video is generated using the object information and the image); and
displaying the sample media content in association with the object (FIG. 20 and [0073-0075]: as stated in [0073], “If a teaser video is to be implemented, the gift card ordering application 104 presents a teaser video template screen (FIG. 20) that provides template for the recorded video. Each template includes a structure, such as the recording time, screen density, and any textual or graphic embellishments that is displayed along with the teaser video segment.”).
Regarding claim 4, Glass further teaches the method according to claim 3, wherein displaying the sample media content in association with the object comprises:
obtaining a cover of the object identifier based on the sample media content; and
updating and displaying the object identifier based on the cover, wherein the object identifier comprises the cover (FIG. 20 and [0073-0075]: a cover is obtained based on the sample media content/teaser video. The object identifier is updated and displayed based on the cover).
Regarding claim 5, Glass further teaches the method according to claim 4, wherein the cover includes at least a part of the sample media content (FIG. 20 and [0073-0075]: the cover includes at least a part of the sample media content/teaser video).
Regarding claim 6, Glass further teaches the method according to claim 5, wherein the object identifier comprises a cover and an icon (FIGS. 10-11 and [0069-0070]: the object identifier, as seen in FIG. 11, comprises a cover, such as a cover with a particular design, and an icon, such as that for “Add photo”).
Regarding claim 7, Glass further teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein a display region of the icon is included in a display region of the cover, and the display region of the icon covers a part of the display region of the cover (FIGS. 10-11 and [0069-0070]: the object identifier, as seen in FIG. 11, comprises a cover, such as a cover with a particular design, which, in a display region, includes an icon, such as that for “Add photo”, that covers part of the cover).
Regarding claims 16-22, the claims recite an electronic device, comprising a memory, a processor and a computer program stored on the memory and runnable on the processor, the processor, upon executing the computer program (FIGS. 1A-B, [0039], and [0046-0048]: as seen in FIG. 1B, computing device 108 comprises memory 142, processors 140, and a computer program/user application 152 stored on the memory and runnable on the processor), performing operations corresponding to the method of claims 1-7, respectively, and are therefore rejected on the same premises.
Regarding claims 25 and 26, the claims recite a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, the computer program, upon executed by a processor ([0011], claim 19, FIGS. 1A-B, [0039], and [0046-0048]), performing operations corresponding to the method of claims 1 and 2, respectively, and are therefore rejected on the same premises.
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glass et al. (US 2013/0304605 A1), in view of Hu et al. (US 2022/0067387 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Glass further teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein the object identifier comprises an original cover of the object if no sample media content of the object exists (FIG. 11 and [0070]: for example, prior to the user recording a video, there is no sample media content so the object identifier comprises an original cover of the object).
Glass does not explicitly teach updating and displaying the object identifier based on the cover comprises: replacing the original cover with the cover for display with the object identifier currently comprising the original cover of the object.
Hu teaches updating and displaying the object identifier based on the cover comprises:
replacing the original cover with the cover for display with the object identifier currently comprising the original cover of the object (FIGS. 1, 4, and 5 and [0060-0064]: the original cover is replaced with the cover for display with the object identifier currently comprising the original cover of the object/video. The display of the object identifier is exemplified in FIG. 5 and may be any video cover).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Glass by incorporating the teachings of Hu so as to include updating and displaying the object identifier based on the cover comprises: replacing the original cover with the cover for display with the object identifier currently comprising the original cover of the object. Doing so would allow a more appealing, effective, and/or relevant cover to replace an original cover. Such a new cover may more effectively attract attention of or convey the contents of the media content which the object identifier represents.
Regarding claim 23, the claim recites an electronic device corresponding to the method of claim 8 and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claim(s) 9 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glass et al. (US 2013/0304605 A1), in view of Ubillos (US 2010/0083114 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Glass teaches the method according to claim 1. Glass does not explicitly teach wherein in response to the triggering for the object identifier, displaying the attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier comprises: in response to second triggering for the object identifier, displaying a second attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier, wherein the second attribute setting interface comprises a predetermined control, the predetermined control is used for configured to perform performing a predetermined operation on the object, and the predetermined operation comprises at least one of topping, hiding and deleting.
Ubillos teaches wherein in response to the triggering for the object identifier, displaying the attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier comprises:
in response to second triggering for the object identifier, displaying a second attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier, wherein the second attribute setting interface comprises a predetermined control, the predetermined control is used for configured to perform performing a predetermined operation on the object, and the predetermined operation comprises at least one of topping, hiding and deleting ([0036]: “For example, the stabilization control panel 225 can be displayed in the user interface 200 in response to a selection, for example, a selection of a key on a keyboard, a mouse button, a touch screen, and the like. In some implementations, the stabilization control panel can include a check box that, when checked, can enable stabilizing unstable segments in one or more video clips displayed in the project pane 205. The video clip on which stabilization operations need to be performed can be selected by the user. Based on the selection, the stabilization operations can be performed on all the video clips in the project pane 205 or on one or more selected video clips.”; FIGS. 4-6, [0054-0060]: a second attribute setting interface can be seen in FIG. 4 in which stabilization control panel is displayed and unstable segments are displayed in edit pane 210 in response to second triggering for the object identifier, like selection of unstable segment 220 seen in FIG. 4, which corresponds to new thumbnail 410 in FIG. 4. As supported in [0058], “For example, a user can select an indicia 230 over a region in a thumbnail and select the "Delete" key. In response, the system 100 can hide the region over which the indicia 230 is displayed, from the project pane 205. Further, the system 100 can re-arrange the thumbnails in the thumbnail group 220 in which the selected region was included. The system 100 can re-arrange the thumbnails to eliminate any gaps between thumbnails.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Glass by incorporating the teachings of Ubillos so as to include wherein in response to the triggering for the object identifier, displaying the attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier comprises: in response to second triggering for the object identifier, displaying a second attribute setting interface of the object corresponding to the object identifier, wherein the second attribute setting interface comprises a predetermined control, the predetermined control is used for configured to perform performing a predetermined operation on the object, and the predetermined operation comprises at least one of topping, hiding and deleting. Doing so would allow the user to conserve storage space by deleting low quality, less useful, and/or irrelevant media content. This would also yield more concise and effective media content.
Regarding claim 24, the claim recites an electronic device corresponding to the method of claim 9 and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In Remarks, Applicant argues:
Regarding amended claim 1, “Glass’s user… is a consumer or purchaser who selects from pre-existing occasions and gift card holder designs provided by the system” (p. 2 of Remarks). “The operative verbs throughout Glass are consistently ‘select’ and ‘search’—never ‘create’ or ‘author.’ (p. 3 of Remarks). “Glass’s user and the objects… is one of selection and customization, not creation and authorship” (p. 3 of Remarks).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding point (a), Applicant’s amendments have changed the scope of claim 1. Nonetheless, Glass still anticipates amended claim 1 and an updated mapping of Glass is provided in this Office Action.
First, Applicant appears to discredit “a consumer or purchaser” from being a creator or author. The Examiner’s position is that (i) a consumer or purchaser and (ii) a creator or author are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, how Glass’s user “selects from pre-existing occasions and gift card holder designs”, as Applicant describes on page 2 of the Remarks, even as a consumer or purchaser, is an exemplary creative act to author an appealing and relevant gift card for a particular occasion. Other creative acts performed by the first user are evident in Glass. For example, in the context of claim 1, an object created by the first user may be a photo which the user uploads from their phone. The claim does not detail an object created or authored in such a way that precludes the teachings of Glass.
Second, the diction of a prior art’s disclosure does not have to match verbatim the language of a claim for it to be anticipated by the prior art. It is clear from Glass’s disclosure that personalization of a gift card is done with creative liberties by an author. Glass’s disclosure includes many operative verbs that share the same meaning as “create” or “author”. For example, the Examiner’s position is that a user selecting an option for customization qualifies as a creative expression. Moreover, Applicant’s assertion that Glass does not include operative verbs for “create” or “author”, while unpersuasive, is also false. Glass’s invention pertains to “[a] personalized gift card creation system and method” (abstract). This “creation” is operated by a user ([0067]).
Overall, Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive. Independent claim 1, and similarly independent claims 16 and 25, are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Glass et al. (US 2013/0304605 A1). The dependent claims remain rejected.
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 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 KENNY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4980. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7AM to 5PM.
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, KIEU D VU can be reached on (571)272-4057. 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.
/KENNY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights