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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 9, 11-14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Del Val et al. (US 2006/0064721) and Holland et al. (US 2024/0414407).
Regarding claim 1, Del Val teaches a computer-implemented method comprising:
generating an update message based on a state update associated with an event ([0058], “According to one embodiment, the disclosed system utilizes four different kinds of program guide synchronization data: a ‘full update’ synchronization, a ‘schedule update’ synchronization, a ‘trim update’ synchronization, and an ‘annotation update’ synchronization. Any of these updates may be provided to the media centers 334 without any prompting for updates or updated data by the media centers 334. As a result, the updates may be made in real-time as programming changes are detected,….” [0073], “The schedule update information may comprise only basic data 362, or a subset of the basic data, such as a revised start time and a revised stop time. After this information is loaded into the HMC configuration server 316, the updated program guide information is broadcasted to all of the active media centers 334 (375e).”);
identifying one or more subscribed devices associated with the event ([0037], “The synchronized EPG server 300 is operable to communicate through a communications network 332 with one or more recording devices 334, also called media centers.”); and
broadcasting the update message to the one or more subscribed devices to cause a re-rendering of one or more prefetched user interface elements associated with the event ([0057], “Once the media center 334 receives the EPG data sent through the communications network 332, this data can be presented to the user on the display device 342 to allow the user to select what programs should be recorded.” [0073], “Upon receiving the updated schedule data, the HMC configuration agent 336 at each media center 334 will either store the schedule data in the HDD 340 or filter out all of the unnecessary versions of the schedule data based upon its associated target data (375f). After this, the HMC configuration agent 336 at each media center 334 will update the EPG data on its corresponding HDD 340 with the new schedule data that has just been broadcasted (375g).”).
Del Val does not expressly teach that the event is a streaming platform event. Del Val also does not expressly teach that the re-rendering is within a streaming platform application on the one or more subscribed devices.
Holland teaches a streaming platform event, and a streaming platform application on one or more subscribed devices ([0017], “The media content stream 104 may include one or more streaming media content events (referred to herein interchangeably as a ‘digital program’ or ‘program’) provided from the media content broadcast facility over the broadcast system (not shown) operated by a media content service provider.” [0030], “The user interface integration component 134 is configured to generate a channel guide user interface (also referred to and used interchangeably with “channel surfing user interface”). In some embodiments, the user interface integration component 134 may transmit the channel guide user interface to the media presentation system 108 to allow the presentation of the channel guide user interface on the visual display device 110. In alternative embodiments, the user interface integration component 134 can integrate the channel guide 106 seamlessly into an existing user interface of the media streaming application of the media presentation system 108.”).
In view of Holland’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination such that the event is a streaming platform event, and that the re-rendering is within a streaming platform application on the one or more subscribed devices. The modification would allow for the reception and display of streaming video content. The modification would thereby enhance the user experience.
Regarding claim 9, Del Val teaches a system comprising: at least one physical processor; and physical memory comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one physical processor, cause the at least one physical processor to perform acts comprising the method of claim 1 ([0026], [0056], Figs. 1-3). The grounds of rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103 are similarly applied to the remaining limitations of claim 9.
Regarding claim 17, Del Val teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising one or more computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor of a computing device, cause the computing device to perform the method of claim 1 ([0026], [0056], Figs. 1-3). The grounds of rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103 are similarly applied to the remaining limitations of claim 17.
Regarding claims 3, 11 and 18, the combination teaches further comprising causing the one or more subscribed devices to prefetch state-specific data associated with the streaming platform event (Del Val: [0040], “At certain designated times, the megatext files are ‘pushed’ from the database repository 320 to each of the media centers 334. Each of these megatext files can be considered ‘dynamic data’ because it may be continuously updated with new information. This ‘dynamic data’ can be merged with certain ‘static data’ at each of the media centers 334 to form a rich multimedia experience that is presented to the user on his/her video display 342.”).
Regarding claims 4 and 12, the combination teaches wherein the state-specific data associated with the streaming platform event comprises live event user interface elements, live event metadata, and a coordinated schedule associated with the streaming platform event (Del Val: [0051], “Although some of the data stored in the EPG database 361 is fairly standardized (such as a program's title, start time, end time, channel and medium) a great deal of the content contains unique and creative content. For example, the EPG database 361 contains keywords, HTML pages, video files, and critical ratings associated with many of the broadcast programs stored in the database 361.” [0057], “Once the media center 334 receives the EPG data sent through the communications network 332, this data can be presented to the user on the display device 342 to allow the user to select what programs should be recorded.” [0071], i.e., programs may be live)
Regarding claims 5 and 13, the combination teaches wherein generating the update message based on the state update comprises generating a message reflecting a change to the coordinated schedule associated with the streaming platform event (Del Val: [0071], “‘Schedule updates’ can also be used to address the situation where an existing program is running long. For example, a sporting event may run into overtime or a live program may run long. In these situations, existing video recorders that do not receive real-time schedule updates would stop recording at the previously scheduled stop time. A media center 334 equipped with the disclosed ‘schedule update’ feature, however, would be able to receive commands in real-time with programming changes that can instruct it to continue recording a program that runs long.” [0072]).
Regarding claims 6 and 14, the combination teaches wherein the state update associated with the streaming platform event comprises current state metadata received from a live event monitoring service (Del Val: [0067], “In FIG. 3B, the process starts (370a) by first updating the EPG database 361 at the synchronized EPG server 300 with program information from the administrative terminals 328 (370b). This data can either be entered manually, or it can be automated based upon data provided by the broadcasters, but in either case is typically provided in real-time with changes made to the scheduled programming.” [0072], “A representative process flow of a schedule update is depicted in FIG. 3C. In FIG. 3C, the process starts (375a) by first updating the electronic program guide database 361 with real-time program information from the administrative terminals 328 (375b). These real-time updates can reflect the changes in programming described above or any other type of update that is being provided.” Figs. 3, 3C).
Claim(s) 2 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Del Val, Holland, and Kedenburg, III (US 2018/0146217, hereinafter “Kedenburg”).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, the combination teaches the limitations specified above; however, the combination does not expressly teach wherein the streaming platform event is a live streaming event.
Kedenburg teaches a live streaming event ([0019], “One or more embodiments described herein include a video presentation system that allows a broadcaster to enhance and share a live video stream using a mobile computing device (e.g., a smart phone). In particular, the video presentation system enables a broadcaster to capture a live video stream with the broadcasting device, select one or more enhancements to provide in conjunction with the live video stream, and accordingly, create an enhanced live video presentation to provide to one or more viewer client devices. In particular, as will be described in further detail below, the video presentation system gathers information associated with a live video stream and generates a video enhancement overlay that includes information associated with the live video stream.”).
In view of Kedenburg’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein the streaming platform event is a live streaming event in order to enable users to receive additional and/or alternative forms of content. The modification would serve to improve the user experience.
Claim(s) 7, 15, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Del Val, Holland, and Llamas Virgen et al. (US 2024/0121484).
Regarding claims 7, 15, and 19, the combination teaches further comprising:
storing the update message (Del Val: [0073], “After this information is loaded into the HMC configuration server 316, the updated program guide information is broadcasted to all of the active media centers 334 (375e). Upon receiving the updated schedule data, the HMC configuration agent 336 at each media center 334 will either store the schedule data in the HDD 340 or filter out all of the unnecessary versions of the schedule data based upon its associated target data (375f).”); and
broadcasting the update message to a subscribed device to cause the re-rendering of the one or more prefetched user interface elements associated with the streaming platform event within the streaming platform application on the subscribed device (Del Val: [0057], “Once the media center 334 receives the EPG data sent through the communications network 332, this data can be presented to the user on the display device 342 to allow the user to select what programs should be recorded.” [0073], “Upon receiving the updated schedule data, the HMC configuration agent 336 at each media center 334 will either store the schedule data in the HDD 340 or filter out all of the unnecessary versions of the schedule data based upon its associated target data (375f). After this, the HMC configuration agent 336 at each media center 334 will update the EPG data on its corresponding HDD 340 with the new schedule data that has just been broadcasted (375g).” Holland: [0017], [0030]).
However, the combination does not expressly teach determining that an additional subscribed device came online during the streaming platform event, and that the broadcasting comprises broadcasting the update message to the additional subscribed device to cause the re-rendering of the one or more prefetched user interface elements associated with the streaming platform event within the streaming platform application on the additional subscribed device.
Llamas Virgen teaches determining that a device came online during a streaming event, and sending an update message to thedevice ([0037], “As a new stream consumer joins the stream, it might be desired to send the most up-to-date metadata to that stream consumer, and such activity by the stream producer might be out-of-band relative to any metadata updating and sending it performs for the existing consumers of that stream.”).
In view of Llamas Virgen’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination to include determining that an additional subscribed device came online during the streaming platform event, and that the broadcasting comprises broadcasting the update message to the additional subscribed device to cause the re-rendering of the one or more prefetched user interface elements associated with the streaming platform event within the streaming platform application on the additional subscribed device. The modification would enable a combined system to provide new viewers with the most up-to-date information. The modification would thereby improve the user experience.
Claim(s) 8, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over a combination of Del Val, Holland, Kedenburg, and Bodnar (US 8671427).
Regarding claims 8, 16 and 20, the combination teaches the limitations specified above; however, the combination does not expressly teach:
receiving an additional state update indicating that the streaming platform event has concluded;
generating an additional update message based on the additional state update; and
broadcasting the additional update message to the one or more subscribed devices to cause a removal of the one or more prefetched user interface elements associated with the streaming platform event within the streaming platform application on the one or more subscribed devices.
Kedenburg teaches: receiving an additional state update indicating that an event has concluded; generating an additional update message based on the additional state update; and sending the additional update message to the one or more subscribed devices to cause a modification of the one or more user interface elements associated with the event within a streaming application on one or more subscribed devices ([0031], “As further shown in FIG. 1, the video presentation environment 100 includes server device(s) 108 including a communication system 110 that further includes a video presentation system 112 implemented thereon.” [0083], “For example, FIG. 5A illustrates a first animation 502 to indicate that the event has finished and that the Thunder won the basketball game. In particular, as shown in FIG. 5A, the video enhancement overlay includes an animation that includes streamers and text that reads ‘Thunder Win!’ over a portion of the live video stream display 208. In addition, as shown in FIG. 5B, the enhanced live video presentation includes a second animation 504. For example, as shown in FIG. 5B, the second animation includes a fire animation around the second score field 304a.” [0084], “In one or more embodiments, the video presentation system 112 generates the animation based on detecting a trigger condition associated with the event. For example, as shown in FIG. 5A, the video presentation system 112 causes the mobile client device 202 to display the first animation 502 upon determining that the basketball game has finished.”).
In view of Kedenburg’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination to include receiving an additional state update indicating that the streaming platform event has concluded; generating an additional update message based on the additional state update; and broadcasting the additional update message to the one or more subscribed devices to cause a modification of the one or more prefetched user interface elements associated with the streaming platform event within the streaming platform application on the one or more subscribed devices.
The combination teaches the limitations specified above; however, the combination does not expressly teach the additional update message to the one or more subscribed devices causing a removal of the one or more prefetched user interface elements.
Bodnar teaches, when an event has concluded, causing a removal of one or more user interface elements (col. 10, lines 48-52, “If the data stream has ended (i.e. is not real-time) in one embodiment, at block 530 it is removed from the user's VOD display. In another embodiment, it is moved from the real-time listings to the "stored personal data" listings. The process then ends at block 535.”).
In view of Bodnar’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination wherein the additional update message to the one or more subscribed devices causes a removal of the one or more prefetched user interface elements. The modification would serve to facilitate navigation of the user interface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Legendre et al. (US 2018/0192111) updating local electronic programming guide data ([0054]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL R TELAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5940. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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 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.
/MICHAEL R TELAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426