Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
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), filed on 7/8/2025 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/8/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues with respect to independent claims such as claim 1 that the amended limitations overcome the current rejection.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. See Examiner’s response/citation below in the rejection section corresponding to the amended limitations. Specifically, see col. 6, lines 24-30, “The users may receive new annotations upon connection or logging in of the devices to the server 102 (this may be referred to an on-connection synchronization). Or, if already connected, members of the group may receive annotations as they become available in real time (this may be referred to as real-time push or pull). See Figures 2-3, wherein annotations are displayed together with the corresponding page/content. Also see Col.. 6, last para to page 7, para 1, “When viewing content, such as reading a book, a user may read other users' annotations and comments as threads. Each thread may be tied to the page the original annotation was made on… So if a user is reading a book on page 26, the user will be able to view annotations and comments made by other users in connection with page 26. These can be in chronological order within a page view.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
4. Claims 1-6, 8-15, 17-18 and 20 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Haynes, II et al (US 9892104, hereafter “Haynes”).
As to claim 1, Haynes discloses a method for presenting media content on a first client computer of a plurality of client computers that are participating in a joint collaboration session, the method comprising:
receiving, from a server, the media content at the first client computer of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session (col. 4, paragraph 1, “A user accesses the server 102 by using a remote device 104, 106 or 108. For example, the server 102 may host a website portal which can be accessed by users of the devices 104, 106 or 108”; para 2, “digital content, such as e-books, are initially stored at the server 102. Users can access the content by downloading individual files, such as an e-book file, to a remote device 104, 106 or 108 and/or by viewing the content using a display screen of a remote device 104”; col. 6, lines 24-30, “The users may receive new annotations upon connection or logging in of the devices to the server 102 (this may be referred to an on-connection synchronization). Or, if already connected, members of the group may receive annotations as they become available in real time (this may be referred to as real-time push or pull)”);
presenting the media content-at the first client computer of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session (col. 4, para 1, “A user accesses the server 102 by using a remote device 104, 106 or 108. For example, the server 102 may host a website portal which can be accessed by users of the devices 104, 106 or 108”; para 2, “digital content, such as e-books, are initially stored at the server 102. Users can access the content by downloading individual files, such as an e-book file, to a remote device 104, 106 or 108 and/or by viewing the content using a display screen of a remote device 104”) that provides for synchronized viewing of the media content across the plurality of client computers (col. 6, lines 24-30, “The users may receive new annotations upon connection or logging in of the devices to the server 102 (this may be referred to an on-connection synchronization). Or, if already connected, members of the group may receive annotations as they become available in real time (this may be referred to as real-time push or pull)”. See Figures 2-3, wherein annotations are displayed together with the corresponding page/content; See Col.. 6, last para to page 7, para 1, “When viewing content, such as reading a book, a user may read other users' annotations and comments as threads. Each thread may be tied to the page the original annotation was made on… So if a user is reading a book on page 26, the user will be able to view annotations and comments made by other users in connection with page 26. These can be in chronological order within a page view”);
receiving, at the first client computer of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session, a selection of an option that enables annotations for real-time display during the joint collaboration session, on the media content that is to be shared by a user of the first client computer during the collaboration session (col. 4, lines 20-32, “each user can engage in other interactions, including creating, viewing and commenting on annotations within the context of the digital content…Users (which may also be referred to as readers or consumers) of content may select a particular title, portion of the title or location within the title to be associated with an annotation created by the user”, wherein the user’s association of the selected portion of or the location within the digital content with an annotation created by the user indicates a selection of an option that enables annotations on the selected media content, wherein the selected portion of or the location within the digital content is the selected media content, which is to be shared by the user of the first client computer during the collaboration session along with the annotations, see Figures 8-11, other users’ computers displaying the first user’s annotation along with the corresponding selected portion of or location within a digital content selected by the first user to be associated with the annotation therefore both the portion and the corresponding annotation are considered to be shared by the first user. It is to be noted that the claim does not require a specific type of collaboration, nor does the claim limit whether or not other users have access to the media content prior to the first user’s sharing);
sending the selected option enabling the annotations on the media content for storage at the server to allow subsequent annotations on the media content to be provided by two or more of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session (col. 4, lines 33-45, “The annotation is stored in a manner that maintains its association with the particular title, portion of the title and/or location within the title that is selected by the user. For example, an annotation may be created by the user using the user's remote device 102, 104 or 106. The annotation may then be communicated to the server 102 along with information that identifies the particular title, portion of the title and/or location within the title, as selected by the user. The server 102 then stores the annotation, the information that identifies the particular title, portion of the title and/or location within the title, as selected by the user, as 45 well as information that identifies the user”; col. 4, last para, “Users can indicate the location of something noteworthy (e.g., by highlighting text or by book marking a page). Based upon the reader's selected setting for the title or a default setting, other viewers can see when a portion of the volume has been indicated”),
wherein a respective annotation on the media content to be shared by the user of the first client computer during the joint collaboration session is to be formatted for presentation at each of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session and be associated with a user of a corresponding client computer that has provided the respective annotation (Col. 4, lines 47-53, “the digital content which can be stored by the server 102 and accessed by users includes digital information that can delivered to users in a variety of formats, including: e-books (epub, PDF, HTML, and other industry standards), audio files ( downloadable files and streaming audio)”; col. 4, last para, “Users can indicate the location of something noteworthy ( e.g., by highlighting text or by book marking a page). Based upon the reader's selected setting for the title or a default setting, other viewers can see when a portion of the volume has been indicated”);
receiving, at the first client computer of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session, a first annotation on the media content shared by the user of the first client computer and a second annotation on the media content shared by the user of the first client computer, wherein the first annotation on the media content shared by the user of the first client computer was provided by a user of a second client computer of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session and the second annotation on the media content shared by the user of the first client computer was provided by a user of a third client computer of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session (col 6, lines 15-30, “annotations may be communicated from one user's device 104, 106 and 108 to another device 102, 104 and 106 (e.g., by wireless communication) where they are aggregated and stored before being uploaded to the server 102…if already connected, members of the group may receive annotations as they become available in real time (this may be referred to as real-time push or pull)”; see Figures 7-11, wherein the annotations received from two different users are received and displayed); and
presenting, in accordance with the selected option enabling the annotations on the media content shared by the user of the first client computer, the first and second annotations on the media content shared by the user of the first client computer at the first client computer of the plurality of client computers participating in the joint collaboration session, wherein the first and second annotations on the media content shared by the user of the first client computer are presented with identifiers associated with the second and third client computers respectively (see citation in rejection to the preceding limitation, and Figures 7-11).
As to claim 10, see similar rejection to claim 1.
As to claim 17, see similar rejection to claim 1.
As to claim 2, Haynes discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first or second annotation is at least one of an annotation drawing, an annotation text (figures 8-11), or an annotation bubble.
As to claim 11, see similar rejection to claim 2.
As to claim 18, see similar rejection to claim 2.
As to claim 3, Haynes discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the media content comprises a sequence of images representing one or more scenes (col. 4, lines 20-27, “each user can engage in other interactions, including creating, viewing and commenting on annotations within the context of the digital content. As used herein the term "title" or "volume" refer to a particular work of digital content, such as a particular e-book, video file or multi-media presentation”).
As to claim 12, see similar rejection to claim 3.
As to claim 4, Haynes discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising presenting, at the first client computer, a comment frame for displaying comments associated with the media content, wherein the comment frame includes a scroll bar that enables the first client computer to navigate through the comments of the comment frame (Figures 8-11).
As to claim 13, see similar rejection to claim 4.
As to claim 5, Haynes discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the media content comprises a presentation document, and wherein the method further comprises presenting a scroll bar that enables the first client computer to navigate through images of the presentation document (see citation in rejection to claim 1, and Figures 8-11, wherein the eBook is a presentation document).
As to claim 14, see similar rejection to claim 5.
As to claim 6, Haynes discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising presenting a video controller that enables the first client computer to navigate through images of the video (col. 4, lines 20-27, “each user can engage in other interactions, including creating, viewing and commenting on annotations within the context of the digital content. As used herein the term "title" or "volume" refer to a particular work of digital content, such as a particular e-book, video file or multi-media presentation”, wherein the controller that controls presentation of the video file is a video controller).
As to claim 8, Haynes discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first client computer is a leader client computer in the plurality of client computers that are participating in the collaboration session (see citation in rejection to claim 1, wherein the first client computer of the first user who selects a portion/location of the content to annotate can be considered a leader client computer).
As to claim 9, Haynes discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the option further defines how the subsequent annotations on the media content that were provided via the two or more of the plurality of client computers are to be formatted for real-time display on the media content at each of the plurality of client computers, and wherein sending the option to the server causes the subsequent annotations on the media content that were provided via the two or more of the plurality of client computers are to be formatted based on the option for presentation of the media content with respective annotations at each of the plurality of client computers (see citation in rejection to claim 1, wherein the location of the content to annotate is a type of format for the annotation. See also Col. 5, “The user's annotations can be added as text, tags or additional settings to the indicated location in the title.” See also Figures 8-11, wherein the annotations are entered and displayed in a format as along/at the indicated location of the content).
As to claim 15, see similar rejection to claim 9.
As to claim 20, see similar rejection to claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. Te following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
6. Claims 7, 16 and 19 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Haynes, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sabin et al (U.S. Patent No. 2010/0251141).
As to claim 7, Haynes discloses the claimed invention substantially as discussed in claim 1, but does not expressly disclose receiving, at the first client computer, a selection of a duration of display for the first or second annotation; and sending the duration of display for the first or second annotation to the server to cause an annotation on the media content presented at the plurality of client computers to fade out after the duration. Sabin discloses a concept of a selection of a duration of display for annotations; and sending the duration of display for the annotations to the server to cause the annotations presented at a plurality of client computers to fade out after the duration ([0066], “users add comments in the form of notes directly to the webpage. These are selected from colors and styles that are available in the plugin, such as various balloon text or callout boxes. The user can drag and drop the note onto the webpage and add their comment or rating. The plugin stores the location where the note appears, either in relation to the browser or in relation to the website content. When a second user visits the site, they will see the note added by the first user. The note can include the user's name that added their note or their profile picture. Optionally, the user can limit notes to only those displayed by friends or only those added by certain users. Also optionally, notes can be set to expire after a certain time period so that they vanish from the webpage. As the note draws nearer to its expiration date, the note fades in color, becoming more and more transparent. Notes are set to always be on top, with the latest note overriding the display of earlier notes.”).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled in the art to combine Haynes with Sabin. The suggestion/motivation of the combination would have been to remove expired comments (Sabin, [0066]).
As to claim 16, see similar rejection to claim 7.
As to claim 19, see similar rejection to claim 7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUA FAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5311. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-6.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HUA FAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458