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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot as discussed in new ground of rejection below.
Applicant argues the amendments are supported by the specification as filed (page 12). This argument is respectfully traversed.
Regarding the negative limitation at issue (i.e., the Ad template does not specify particular art content or ad type” as newly added into independent claims 1, 8, 15), the specification does not identify any "descri[ption of] a reason to exclude the relevant limitation." Santarus, Inc. v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., 694 F.3d 1344, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ("Negative claim limitations are adequately supported when the specification describes a reason to exclude the relevant limitation. Such written description support need not rise to the level of disclaimer. In fact, it is possible for the patentee to support both the inclusion and exclusion of the same material."). See also MPEP § 2173.05(i) ("Any negative limitation or exclusionary proviso must have basis in the original disclosure ....The mere absence of a positive recitation is not basis for an exclusion.").
In this case, the originally-filed specification merely describes “the Ad templates serve as frameworks for organizing Ad content and can be stored in database 120. An example Ad template may include various configuration parameters such as a placeholder for the duration or time length of the ad, a generic filed for specifying media elements…, among others. (see paragraphs 0034-0036). The specification does not provide any reason to exclude features to specify particular ad content or ad type. In particular, the specification does not have support for limitation “…Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type” as recited in the amended claims 1, 8, 15. In fact, paragraph [0035] describes “Ad template 123 can be classified based on the characteristic of the content item, for example, the theme or genre of the associated content item, the visual style of the content item…among others”. Thus, it appears that the Ad template specify particular ad content or ad type so that the “Ad template can be classified based on the characteristics such as theme, genre, predefined criteria for associated content.
Applicant further argues the cited references fail to disclose, teach, or suggest the amended requirement of claim 1 that the user device receives, as part of the content manifest responses, an advertisement (Ad) template for a PauseAd that comprises a framework for organizing PauseAd content, including configuration parameters according to one of more placeholders for visual elements, and wherein the Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type (page 14).
In response, Riedl discloses content playlist response including content playlist file associated with content item and an advertisement (Ad) template (playlist data structure for ad) for pauseAd (pause Ad playlist in response to pause command to pause playback of program), wherein the Ad template comprises a framework for organizing PauseAd content, including configuration parameters corresponding to one or more placeholder for visual content (read on ad structures comprises a framework in time order or format for organizing advertisement/teaser including parameter/information such as index, location, visual information, etc. to be included within the PauseAd -see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 7-12, paragraphs 0009-0011, 0041, 0056, 0061,0066, 0073, 0085, 0087, 0089-0095, 0103-0108).
Although Examiner does not agree with Applicant’s argument that the cited prior art does not disclose Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type, the Examiner relies on other references such as Bashetty et al. (US 2016/0300259: see for example, paragraphs 0028, 0031-0034) or Fischmann et al. (US 2022/0070546 ; see paragraphs 0030, 0036-0037) as some examples that the teaching is well-known in the art.
For reasons given above, rejections of claims 1-20 are discussed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1-20, each independent claims 1, 8, 15 recites limitation “wherein the Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type”, which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention (see discussion in “response to argument” above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riedl et al. (US 20050060745) in view of Hassler (US 20200037008), Pressnell et al. (US 11438675) or Velmurugan et al. (US 20190146951) and further in view of Bashetty et al. (US 2016/0300259) or Fischmann et al. (US 2022/0070546).
Regarding claim 1, Riedl discloses a method comprising:
sending, by a user device, a content request for a content item to a content provider in communication with the user device (sending, by a client 140, a request for program to a content provider including NDVR control center in communication with the user device – see include, but are not limited to, figures 1-1A, 4, 12, paragraphs 0056, 0070, 0076);
receiving, by the user device, a content request response including a content manifest file associated with the content item and an advertisement (Ad) template, wherein the Ad template comprises a framework for organizing PauseAd content, including configuration parameters corresponding to one or more placeholders for visual elements (receiving, by the client 140, a content request response including content playlist file associated with a content item and advertisement template/structure for PauseAd, wherein the advertisement structure comprises framework/structure for organizing pauseAd content including configuration parameter such as index, location, etc. for an Ad layout of content to be included within the PauseAd – see include, but are not limited to, figures 1A, 4, 5C-5D, 7-12, paragraphs 0009-0011, 0056, 0073, 0076, 0085, 0089-0095, 0103-0108 and discussion in “response to arguments” above);
initiating, by the user device, a single player instance for playback and presentation of main content of the content item according to the content manifest file (selecting, by the client 140, a player instance/display for playback and presentation of main content of program of the content item according the playlist – see include, but are not limited to, figures 1A, 4, 5D, 7-12, paragraphs 0073-0074, 0092);
pausing, by the user device, the playback of the main content at a first time point, in response to a user request received in the user device (pausing, by the client device, the playback of main content of program at time point (e.g., 710) in response to a user request received in the user device – see include, but are not limited to, figures 1A, 7-12, paragraphs 0092, 0094);
receiving, at the user device, a thumbnail image of the main content presented at the first time point (receiving, at the client device, a pause image with video frame located at the pause point for display at the pause point – see include, but are not limited to, paragraphs 0103-0104);
presenting, by the user device, the thumbnail image within the single player instance (displaying, by the client device, the pause image within the display – see include, but are not limited to, paragraphs 0103-0104);
sending, by the user device, an Ad manifest request for a PauseAd to a dynamic manifest generator in communication with the user device (sending, by the client, an ad request for pause advertisement to dynamic generator in communication with the user – see include, but are not limited to, figures 6-12, paragraphs 0056, 0061, 0084, 0087-0088, 0090, 0094, 0100, 0105-0107);
receiving, in the user device, an Ad manifest response from the dynamic manifest generator, the Ad manifest response including an Ad manifest file and an Ad locator to the PauseAd; fetching, by the user device, the PauseAd using the Ad locator ; and
initiating, by the user device, a PauseAd streaming session for playback of the PauseAd within the single player instance, according to the Ad template and according to Ad playlist file (see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 7-12, paragraphs 0009-0011, 0041, 0056, 0061,0066, 0073, 0085, 0087, 0089-0095, 0103-0108 and discussion in “response to arguments” above)
the Ad template and the Ad manifest file (receiving, in the client device, and ad playlist from dynamic ad generator, the playlist comprises pointer/locator of each advertisement; fetching/receiving, by the client, the advertisement from the locator/pointer and initiating, by the client device, playback of the ad according to order/time in playlist - see include, but are not limited to, figures 6-12, paragraphs 0056, 0073, 0081, 0084, 0087-0088, 0090, 0094, 0100, 0105-0107).
Riedl display playlist as a series of pointers to content locations (paragraphs 0073, 0097). However, Riedl does not explicitly disclose the request is manifest request, pointer to content location comprises Ad Uniform Resource Locator, wherein the Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type.
Additionally and/or Alternatively, Hassler discloses sending, by a user device, a content manifest request for a content item to a content provider in communication with the user device (sending, by user device 340, a content manifest request to media delivery system in communication with the client device – see include, but are not limited to, paragraph 0069);
receiving, by the user device, a content manifest response including a content manifest file associated with the content item and an advertisement (Ad) template (receiving, by the client device, content manifest for content segments and advertisement – see include, but are not limited to, paragraphs 0020, 0022, 0070-0071);
pausing, by user device, the playback of main content at a first time point; receiving and presenting at the user device, a thumbnail image of main content (see include, but are not limited to, figures 3A-3B, paragraphs 0022-0023, 0054, 0056, 0067-0069).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Riedl with the teachings comprising sending a content manifest request for content item and receiving content manifest response, and receiving thumbnail in response to pause command as taught by Hassler in order to yield predictable result of allowing user to easily navigate and select desired content at particular point (see paragraph 0004, 0022).
Hassler also discloses manifest may list uniform resource locator (URL) of each segment (paragraph 0022). However, it does not explicitly disclose the URL comprises URL of advertisement (Ad URL).
Pressnell or Velmurugan (hereinafter referred to as Pressnell/Velmurugan discloses the Ad manifest response including an Ad manifest file and an Ad Uniform Resource Locator (URL) to the advertisement; fetching, by the user device, the advertisement using the Ad URL (see include, but are not limited to, Pressnell: figures 4, 6-7, col. 2, lines 1-7, col. 5, lines 24-65; Velmurugan: figures 1-3, paragraphs 0020-0021, 0026, 0030).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Riedl with the teachings including manifest request and URL of advertisement as taught by Pressnell/Velmurugan in order to yield predictable result of allowing the advertisement to be retrieved easily or allowing the code of the manifest to be developed/maintained easily (see for example, Pressnell: col. 5, lines 55-60; Velmurugan: paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0030).
Bashetty or Fischmann (hereinafter referred to as Bashetty/Fischmann) discloses Ad template comprises a framework for organizing Ad content, including configuration parameters corresponding to one or more placeholders for visual elements, and wherein the Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type (e.g., Ad template does not specify ad type – see include, but are not limited to, Bashetty: figures 2-4b; paragraphs 0028, 0031-0034; Fischmann: figures 2D, 2E, paragraphs 0030, 0036-0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Riedl with the teachings including Ad template does not specify particular ad or ad type as taught by Bashetty/Fischmann in order to yield predictable result of improving convenience for tracking information related to display of video advertisement (see for example, Fischmann: paragraphs 0030-0031; Bashetty: 0005-0006).
Regarding claim 2, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: before receiving the thumbnail image, determining, by the user device, that a first period of time has elapsed since the pause without detecting a user interaction event to resume the playback of the main content;
wherein a first configuration parameter corresponding to a filed for specifying a media element, a text element, or an interactive element (before receiving the thumbnail image/I-frame, determining, by the user device, that a first period of time (e.g., 5 seconds) has elapse since the pause without detecting a user select to resume the playback of main content ; wherein the first configuration parameter corresponding to a field for specifying a media element (program element), a text element (e.g., title, ad id, etc.) or an interactive element (link, URL, etc.)– see include, but are not limited to, Hassler: paragraphs 0004, 0068; Riedl: figures 6-12 and also discussion in the rejection of claim 1);
wherein the Ad template is selected from a plurality of Ad templates based at least in part on one or more characteristics of the content item that comprise at least one of: theme, genre, visual style, tone, mood, duration, or contextual relevance of the content item (ad template/playlist structure of pause Ad/pause teaser, etc. is selected from a plurality of templates/playlist data structures with different types of ads, pause teaser, bumper ad, etc. based at least in part of one or more characteristic of the content item such as requested content/program item – see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 6-12, 15,paragraphs 0056, 0073, 0081, 0084, 0087-0088, 0090, 0094, 0100, 0105-0107; Hassler: figures 3A-3B, paragraphs 0022-0023, 0054, 0056, 0067-0069; Pressnell: figures 4, 6-7, col. 2, lines 1-7, col. 5, lines 24-65; Velmurugan: figures 1-3, paragraphs 0020-0021, 0026, 0030; Bashetty: figures 2-4b; paragraphs 0028, 0031-0034; Fischmann: figures 2D, 2E, paragraphs 0030, 0040).
Regarding claim 3, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: before initiating, by the user device, a PauseAd streaming session, determining, by the user device, that a second period of time has elapsed since the presentation of the thumbnail image without detecting a user interaction event to stop the playback of the PauseAd (second period is read on period to first/second advertisement - see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 7-12 or period to receive next-I frame after pause command- Hassler: figures 3A-3B, 4, paragraphs 0004, 0068).
Regarding claim 4, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the user device, that a third period of time has elapsed since the playback of the PauseAd without detecting a user interaction event to stop the playback of the PauseAd;
sending a second Ad manifest request for a new PauseAd to the dynamic manifest generator;
receiving, in the user device, a new Ad manifest response including a new Ad manifest file and a new Ad URL to the new PauseAd;
fetching, by the user device, the new PauseAd using the new Ad URL; and initiating playback of the new PauseAd in the PauseAd streaming session immediately after the playback of the new PauseAd is completed, according to the Ad template and the new Ad manifest file (sending request for next pause advertisement when no selection to resume main content after pause command – see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 7-12, paragraphs 0092, 0094, 0098, 0104-0108; Hassler: figures 3a-3b, 4, paragraphs 0004, 0068; Pressnell: figures 4, 6-7, col. 2, lines 1-7, col. 5, lines 24-65; Velmurugan: figures 1-3, paragraphs 0020-0021,0030).
Regarding claim 5, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: presenting the thumbnail image after the playback of the PauseAd is completed; determining, by the user device, that a fourth period of time has elapsed since the presentation of the thumbnail image without a user interaction event to resume the playback of the main content; sending a second Ad manifest request for a new PauseAd from the user device to the dynamic manifest generator; receiving, in the user device, a new Ad manifest response including a new Ad manifest file and a new Ad URL to the new PauseAd; fetching, by the user device, the new PauseAd using the new Ad URL; and initiating, by the user device, a new PauseAd streaming session for playback of the new PauseAd within the same player instance, according to the Ad template and the new Ad manifest file (see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 7-12, paragraphs 0092, 0094, 0098, 0104-0108; Hassler: figures 3a-3b, 4, paragraphs 0004, 0068; Pressnell: figures 4, 6-7, col. 2, lines 1-7, col. 5, lines 24-65; Velmurugan: figures 1-3, paragraphs 0020-0021,0030, wherein “fourth period” is interpreted as another period to subsequent advertisement in the advertisement list or next I-frame after previous advertisement or I frame is received and no selection/resume command is received).
Regarding claim 6, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, in the user device, a user request for resuming the playback of the main content; terminating, by the user device, the PauseAd streaming session to withhold presenting the PauseAd; and presenting, by the user device, the thumbnail image (stop displaying I frame or mage of video in response to receiving resume playback/force playback – see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: paragraphs 0011, 0104, 0106; Hassler: paragraphs 0003-0005, 0033, 0057, 0074-0076).
Regarding claim 7, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the method of claim 6, further comprising: sending a content manifest update request from the user device to the dynamic manifest generator (see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 7-12, paragraphs 0014, claim 20; Hassler: figures 3A-3B, 4, paragraphs 0071-0072, 0080, 0137; Velmurugan: paragraph 0021; Pressnell: figures 3-4, 6-7);
receiving, in the user device, a content manifest update response including an updated content manifest file associated with the content item; and resuming, by the user device, the playback and presentation of the main content according to the updated content manifest file (see include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 7-12, paragraphs 0014, 0104, 0106, claim 20; Hassler: figures 3A-3B, 4, paragraphs 0003-0005, 0071-0072, 0080, 0137; Velmurugan: paragraph 0021; Pressnell: figures 3-4, 6-7).
Regarding claim 8, limitations of a user device that correspond to the limitations of method in claim 1 are analyzed as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Particularly, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses a user device comprising:
one or more processors; and a computer-readable storage media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the user device to perform:
sending a content manifest request for a content item to a content provider in communication with the user device;
receiving a content manifest response including a content manifest file associated with the content item and an Ad template for a PauseAd, wherein the Ad template comprises a framework for organizing PauseAd content, including configuration parameters corresponding to one or more placeholders for visual elements, and wherein the Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type;
initiating a single player instance for playback and presentation of main content of the content item according to the content manifest file; pausing the playback of the main content at a first time point, in response to a user request received in the user device; receiving a thumbnail image of the main content presented at the first time point; presenting the thumbnail image within the single player instance; sending an Ad manifest request for a PauseAd to a dynamic manifest generator in communication with the user device; receiving, an Ad manifest response from the dynamic manifest generator, the Ad manifest response including an Ad manifest file and an Ad URL to the PauseAd; fetching the PauseAd using the Ad URL; and
initiating a PauseAd streaming session for playback of the PauseAd within the single player instance, according to the Ad template and according to the Ad manifest file (see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 1 and include, but are not limited to, Riedl: figures 1-1A, 7-12; Hassler: figures 1-3B; Pressnell: figures 1, 4-7; Bashetty: figures 2-4b; paragraphs 0028, 0031-0034; Fischmann: figures 2D, 2D, paragraphs 0030, 0036-0037).
Regarding claim 9, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the user device of claim 8, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the user device to perform: determining that a first period of time has elapsed since the pause without detecting a user interaction event to resume the playback of the main content, before receiving the thumbnail image (see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 2).
Regarding claim 10, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the user device of claim 8, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the user device to perform: determining that a second period of time has elapsed since the presentation of the thumbnail image without detecting a user interaction event to stop the playback of the PauseAd, before initiating the PauseAd streaming session (see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 3).
Regarding claim 11, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the user device of claim 8, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the user device to perform: determining that a third period of time has elapsed since the playback of the PauseAd without detecting a user interaction event to stop the playback of the PauseAd; sending a second Ad manifest request for a new PauseAd to the dynamic manifest generator; receiving a new Ad manifest response including a new Ad manifest file and a new Ad URL to the new PauseAd; fetching the new PauseAd using the new Ad URL; and initiating playback of the new PauseAd in the PauseAd streaming session immediately after the playback of the new PauseAd is completed, according to the Ad template and the new Ad manifest file (see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 4).
Regarding claim 12, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the user device of claim 8, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the user device to perform: presenting the thumbnail image after the playback of the PauseAd is completed; determining that a fourth period of time has elapsed since the presentation of the thumbnail image without a user interaction event to resume the playback of the main content; sending a second Ad manifest request for a new PauseAd from the user device to the dynamic manifest generator; receiving a new Ad manifest response including a new Ad manifest file and a new Ad URL to the new PauseAd; fetching the new PauseAd using the new Ad URL; and initiating a new PauseAd streaming session for playback of the new PauseAd within the same player instance, according to the Ad template and the new Ad manifest file (see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 5).
Regarding claim 13, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the user device of claim 8, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the user device to perform: receiving a user request for resuming the playback of the main content; terminating the PauseAd streaming session to stop presenting the PauseAd; and presenting, immediately after terminating the PauseAd streaming session, the thumbnail image (see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 6).
Regarding claim 14, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses the user device of claim 13, wherein the instructions when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the user device to perform: sending a content manifest update request to the dynamic manifest generator; receiving a content manifest update response including an updated content manifest file associated with the content item; and resuming the playback and presentation of the main content according to the updated content manifest file (see similar discussion in the rejection of claim 7).
Regarding claim 15, limitations of a system that correspond to the limitations of method and/or user device in claim 1 and/or claim 8 are analyzed as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 and/or claim 8. Particularly, Riedl in view of Hassler, Pressnell/Velmurugan and Bashetty/Fischmann discloses a system comprising: a user device; a dynamic manifest generator; an Ad template generator; and a thumbnail image generator; wherein the user device is configured to: send a content manifest request for a content item to the dynamic manifest generator;
receive a content manifest response generated by the dynamic manifest generator and an Ad template generated by the Ad template generator for a PauseAd , wherein the Ad template comprises a framework for organizing PauseAd content, including configuration parameters corresponding to one or more placeholders for visual elements, and wherein the Ad template does not specify particular ad content or ad type, wherein the content manifest response includes a content manifest file associated with the content item; initiate a single player instance for playback and presentation of main content of the content item according to the content manifest file; pause the playback of the main content at a first time point, in response to a user request received in the user device; receive a thumbnail image generated by the thumbnail image generator, the thumbnail image representing the main content presented at the first time point; present the thumbnail image within the single player instance; send an Ad manifest request for a PauseAd to the Ad manifest generator; receive an Ad manifest response generated by the Ad manifest generator, the Ad manifest response including an Ad manifest file and an Ad URL to the PauseAd; fetch the PauseAd using the Ad URL; and initiate a PauseAd streaming session for playback of the PauseAd within the single player instance, according to the the Ad template and according to the Ad manifest file (see similar discussion to the rejection of claim 1 and/or claim 8 above).
Regarding claim 16-20, the additional limitations that correspond to the additional limitations of claims 9-13 are analyzed as discussed in the rejection of claims 9-13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lo et al. (US 20150269629) disclose targeted advertisement insertion for streaming media data (see also paragraph 0009, claim 1).
Mielechowicz et al. (US 20180047048) discloses ad serving template that specify how an ad is to be displayed or played (see paragraph 0036).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AN SON PHI HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-7295. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-6:30 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, NASSER M. GOODARZI can be reached at 571-272-4195. 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.
/AN SON P HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
February 18, 2026