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 the cited references failed to disclose refining the generated caption text of the context and storyline by using a trained language model to integrate the selected product, service, or brand into the context and storyline to generate ad video sequence description text that describes an ad storyline involving the selected product, service, or brand that couples or blends the selected product, service, or brand with context and storyline of the captured images of the primary video stream; applying the ad video sequence description text to a text-to-video generation model trained to generate photorealistic video frames with object motion from the description text to generate a new advertisement video clip.
However, Lakhani et al disclose a system being able to use natural language processing and the system can provide caption or text description related to an image associated with the primary video stream and context was used to select brands or services as disclosed in para. 0062;0093;0004-0009;0038-0039; 0043-0044; 0053;0069-0070.
And Maalej et al disclose a system being able to use machine learning algorithms to convert contextual data associated with the primary video content to image representing a new advertisement to be inserted in the primary video content and the system is capable of using the supplemental video content analysis module 230 to generate supplemental content based on text containing in video content as disclosed in para. 0056; 0060; 0028-0029; 0031-0033;0057;0043; 0056;0023;0079.
And Sheinfeld et al disclose a system being capable of generating new advertisement by using a Synthetic advertisement generation module and the system can use textual content for generating new advertisement as disclosed in col.6, lines 11-30;col.9, lines 56-67;col.11; lines 46-67.This action is made 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) 1-2; 4; 7-8; 10; 13-15; 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lakhani(US.Pub.No.20160358632) in view of Maalej(US.Pub.No.20220014804) and Sheinfeld(US.Pat.No.8799070) and Sodagar(US.Pub.No.20210099746).
Regarding claim 1, Lakhani et al disclose a method for generating an advertisement video for insertion as an ad into a primary video stream in which the advertisement video promotes a particular product, service, or brand in a manner that is consistent with the context and storyline of the primary video stream before and at the time of ad insertion, comprising: capturing a selected image or images from the primary video stream before an ad splice break(the system is able to identify images from the video stream; 0031;0068-0069);
processing the captured images in an image-to-text description module to generate a caption text that describes a context and storyline of the captured selected images of the primary video stream(the system can provide caption or text description related to an image associated with the primary video stream; 0062;0093;0004-0008);
selecting, from among a plurality of products, services, or brands to be advertised, one product, service, or brand that resembles or is consistent with the context and storyline of the captured images(brands or services can be selected for commercials or recommendations; 0009;0093);
refining the generated caption text of the context and storyline by using a trained language model(the system provides natural language processing; 0043-0044; 0053;0069-0070) to integrate the selected product, service, or brand into the context and storyline to generate ad video sequence description text that describes an ad storyline involving the selected product, service, or brand that couples or blends the selected product, service, or brand with context and storyline of the captured images of the primary video stream(the system can provide caption or text description related to an image associated with the primary video stream and context was used to select brands or services; ; 0062;0093;0004-0009;0038-0039).
But did not explicitly disclose applying the ad video sequence description text to a text-to-video generation model trained to generate photorealistic video frames with object motion from the description text to generate a new advertisement video clip; and inserting the generated new advertisement video clip into the primary video stream by manipulating a streaming manifest to substitute the generated advertisement video clip for the advertisement segment for distribution to video content rendering devices.
However, Maalej et al disclose applying the ad video sequence description text to a text-to-video generation model trained to generate photorealistic video frames ( the system is able to use machine learning algorithms to convert contextual data associated with the primary video content to image representing a new advertisement to be inserted in the primary video content and the system is capable of using the supplemental video content analysis module 230 to generate supplemental content based on text containing in video content; 0056; 0060; 0028-0029; 0031-0033;0057; such as the closed-caption text,0043; 0056;0023;0079).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Maalej to modify Lakhani by providing contextually-related secondary video content related to the primary video content for the purpose of improving viewing experiences of the users accordingly.
And Sheinfeld et al disclose with object motion from the description text to generate a new advertisement video clip(the system is able to generate new advertisement by using a Synthetic advertisement generation module and the system can use textual content for generating new advertisement; col.6, lines 11-30;col.9, lines 56-67;col.11; lines 46-67).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Sheinfeld to modify Lakhani and Maalej by providing options to generate new commercials with respect textual content for the purpose of increasing viewing experiences of the users accordingly
And Sodagar et al disclose inserting the generated new advertisement video clip into the primary video stream by manipulating a streaming manifest to substitute the generated advertisement video clip for the advertisement segment for distribution to video content rendering devices(the system is capable of manipulating the manifest in order to insert commercials; 0060; 0019; 0099).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Sodagar to modify Lakhani and Maalej and Sheinfeld by providing options to manipulate manifest for the purpose of replacing portions of secondary contents accordingly.
Regarding claim 2, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Lakhani et al disclose further comprising enhancing the spatio-temporal dependent structures of the generated new advertisement video clip frames to reduce noise of the video creation process(the system is able to use specific technique for reducing or removing noise in a video frame; 0056).
Regarding claim 7, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 2
Regarding claim 10, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 4.
Regarding claim 13, Lakhani et al disclose wherein the server is configured for use in a content distribution network(see fig.4 with network 230).
Regarding claim 14, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, 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.
Claim(s) 3; 9; 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lakhani(US.Pub.No.20160358632) in view of Maalej(US.Pub.No.20220014804) and Sodagar(US.Pub.20210099746) ) and Sheinfeld(US.Pat.No.8799070) and Skrypnyk(US.Pat.No.10313722).
Regarding claim 3, Lakhani and Maalej and Sodagar and Sheinfeld et al did not explicitly disclose wherein the text-to-video generation model is a diffusion probabilistic model that will solve the likelihood of objects selection based on the tokens in the text.
However, Skrypnyk et al disclose wherein the text-to-video generation model is a diffusion probabilistic model that will solve the likelihood of objects selection based on the tokens in the text(the system is capable of applying specific probability technique for determining likelihood or preferences associated with selected contents; 0169).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Skrypnyk to modify Lakhani and Maalej and Sodagar and Sheinfeld by applying diffusion probabilistic model for the purpose of preferences or likelihood accordingly.
Regarding claim 9, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 3.
Regarding claim 16, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 3.
Claim(s) 5; 11; 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lakhani(US.Pub.No.20160358632) in view of Maalej(US.Pub.No.20220014804) and Sodagar(US.Pub.20210099746) and Sheinfeld(US.Pat.No.8799070) and Searl(US.Pub.No.20240355064).
Regarding claim 5, Lakhani et al disclose wherein capturing selected images from the primary video stream comprises: monitoring the primary video stream to recognize scenes durations(scenes or segments duration is identified; 0053).
But did not explicitly disclose extracting an image within a scene that lasts longer than a threshold duration.
However, Searl et al disclose extracting an image within a scene that lasts longer than a threshold duration(the system is able to select frames based on length exceeding a threshold duration; col.2, lines 18-35+; col.7, lines 29-40+).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Searl to modify Lakhani and Maalej and Sodagar and Sheinfeld by applying threshold duration value for the purpose of selecting frames of video contents accordingly.
Regarding claim 11, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 5.
Regarding claim 18, it is rejected using the same ground of rejection for claim 5.
Claim(s) 6; 12; 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lakhani(US.Pub.No.20160358632) in view of Maalej(US.Pub.No.20220014804) and Sodagar(US.Pub.20210099746) and Sheinfeld(US.Pat.No.8799070) and Nemalipur (US.Pub.No.20250080795).
Regarding claim 6, Lakhani and Maalej and Sodagar and Sheinfeld et al did not explicitly disclose wherein monitoring the primary video stream to recognize scenes that last longer than a threshold duration begins in response to an SCTE35/SCTE104 marker event in the primary video stream that an advertisement insertion opportunity is upcoming.
However, Nemalipuri et al disclose wherein monitoring the primary video stream to recognize scenes that last longer than a threshold duration begins in response to an SCTE35/SCTE104 marker event in the primary video stream that an advertisement insertion opportunity is upcoming(the system is able to use specific protocol as SCTE35 for detecting data in the primary content; 0031;0037).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Nemalipuri to modify Lakhani and Maalej and Sodagar and Sheinfeld by applying SCTE35 for the purpose of using specific protocols to identify insertion points in the primary content accordingly.
Regarding claim 12, 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 6.
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 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
Prosecution Insights