Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action corresponds to application 18/637,958 which was filed on 4/17/2024 and is a CON of 16/929,871 filed 7/15/2020 which is a CON of 14/875,378 which was filed on 10/05/2015 which is a CON of 13/077,761 filed on 03/31/2011 which is a CIP of 12/650,534 filed 12/30/2009 and is a CIP of 12/650,538 filed 12/30/2009 which claim benefit of 61/142,193 and 61/142,193 both filed 12/31/2008.
Response to Amendment
In the reply filed 4/13/2026, claims 1, 8, and 15 have been amended. No additional claims have been added or cancelled. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are currently pending.
The objection to the title has been withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 4/13/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
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) 1-4, 6-11, 13-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas et al. (US2007/0162502, previously presented in ‘892), hereinafter Thomas, in view of Ichioka et al. (US2002/0009283, previously presented in ‘892), hereinafter Ichioka, Day (US2007/0168539, previously presented in ‘892), and Ratliff et al. (US2007/0244903), hereinafter Ratliff.
Regarding Claim 1:
Thomas teaches:
A method comprising: receiving, from a device, a request to automatically store at least one of a plurality of future content items that are not already known to be available at a specific time and date and wherein the request comprises an identifier of an actor (Thomas, Figure 5, [0007, 0065, 0076, 0082-0083, 0090], note searching for content to store to the user’s media library; note the user may search for content items by actor, which also means the search is not for a specific identity of a content item; note the content items may not be available yet, e.g., future content items that are not already known to be available at a specific time and date; note future content items may be automatically stored when the content becomes available);
based at least in part on the receiving the request, generating a reservation data object that: (b) defines at least one source to be monitored for availability of at least one content item of the plurality of future content items that is not already known to be available at a specific time and date and that comprises metadata identifying the actor name (Thomas, figure 5, [0006, 0065-0067, 0082-0083, 0090, 0101], note the user may search for content items by actor, which means the content items comprise metadata identifying the actor; note the user may specify the sources for the content; note the content items may not be available yet, e.g., future content items that are not already known to be available at a specific time and date; note the system may place a placeholder bookmark for content that is not yet available, e.g., reservation data object; note the system may monitor the content sources for when the future content items become available and automatically obtain, e.g., download or record, the item when it becomes available; note the interactive media guidance application may receive and display a content stream or tune to a channel providing the content to which the bookmark was directed, which means the bookmark defines a source of a content item. Additionally, in order to monitor and automatically obtain the content item when it becomes available, the reservation data must define a source to monitor and obtain the data from);
monitoring content availability data of one or more sources at least in part by: identifying, based on the content availability data, a newly available content item from the one or more sources that is scheduled to become available from the one or more sources at a particular time (Thomas, figure 5, [0006, 0065-0067, 0082-0083, 0101-0102], note the user may search for content items by actor; note the user may specify the sources for the content; note the content items may not be available yet, e.g., future content items; note the system may place a placeholder bookmark for content that is not yet available, e.g., reservation data object; note the system may monitor the content sources for when the future content items become available and automatically obtain, e.g., download or record, the item when it becomes available, which means the reservation data was referenced; note the interactive media guidance application may receive and display a content stream or tune to a channel providing the content to which the bookmark was directed, which means the bookmark defines a source of a content item. Thomas further describes using bookmarks for playlists such that the system may “download the content that the playlist bookmarks to (e.g., download the playlist content from their respective sources)” which is interpreted to mean that bookmarks link to respective sources. Additionally, in order to monitor and automatically obtain the content item when it becomes available, the reservation data must define a source to monitor and obtain the data from); and
based at least in part on the monitoring, causing, at the particular time, the newly available content item to be accessible for playing via a user interface that indicates that the newly available content item is available for playing from storage (Thomas, figure 5, [0065-0067, 0082-0083, 0090], note the system may place a placeholder bookmark for content that is not yet available, e.g., reservation data object; note the system may monitor the content sources for when the future content items become available and automatically obtain, e.g., download or record, the item when it becomes available, which is interpreted to mean the monitoring caused the content item to be accessible for playing at the particular time it became available; note the content item is indicated to be available).
While Thomas teaches monitoring content sources for selected future content items and using bookmarks for future content items, Thomas doesn’t explicitly define what the data the bookmark comprises. However, Ichioka is in the same field of endeavor, media data management, and Ichioka teaches:
generating a reservation data object that (b) defines at least one source to be monitored for availability of at least one content item (Ichioka, figures 16 and 18-21, [0187-0199], note scheduling unit comprises information for storing the “TV Content” source and the TVContent also stores a channel number, e.g., source, all of which is used when scheduling programs to be recorded in the future. When combined with the previously cited reference, this would be for the bookmarks and sources monitored for future content as taught by Thomas)
monitoring content availability data of one or more sources at least in part by: referencing the reservation data object (Ichioka, figures 16 and 18-21, [0187-0199], note scheduling unit comprises information for storing the “TV Content” source and the TVContent also stores a channel number, e.g., source, all of which is used when scheduling programs to be recorded in the future; note scheduling content to be recorded is interpreted as monitoring content availably for a content item at a specific time. When combined with the previously cited reference, this would be for the bookmarks and sources monitored for future content as taught by Thomas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of Ichioka because all references are directed to content management and because Ichioka would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in searching for and reserving content which would improve content discovery and retrieval by further defining the scheduling of the content to retrieve which facilitates and manages the automatic retrieval of desired content from multiple sources.
While Thomas as modified teaches monitoring content sources for selected future content items and using bookmarks for future content items, Thomas as modified doesn’t explicitly define that the bookmark comprises an actor’s name. However, Day is in the same field of endeavor, data management, and Day teaches:
based at least in part on the receiving the request, generating a reservation data object that (a) comprises an actor name corresponding to the identifier of the actor and (b) defines at least one source to be monitored for availability of at least one content item of the plurality of future content items that comprises metadata identifying the actor name (Day, figure 4, [0033, 0044], note using metadata to apply to listings to create a list of content to monitor to receive notifications for, e.g., reservation data; note metadata applied may include actors and an actors name is interpreted as the identifier of the actor; note status changes may include availability information. When combined with the previously cited references this would be for the bookmark teaches as taught by Thomas);
monitoring content availability data of one or more sources at least in part by: identifying, based on the content availability data, a newly available content item from the one or more sources that is scheduled to become available from the one or more sources at a particular time (Day, figure 4, [0033, 0041, 0044], note using metadata to apply to listings to create a list of content to monitor to receive notifications for, e.g., reservation data; note metadata applied may include actors which means monitoring content availability is based at least in part on the actor name since that is used to create the list to monitor; note status changes may include availability information; note identifying status changes for monitored content items, which is interpreted to include availability status changes such as becoming available. When combined with the previously cited references this would be for the bookmark teaches as taught by Thomas);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of Day because all references are directed to content management and because Day would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in monitoring content which would improve content discovery and retrieval by incorporating an integrated approach to monitor the status of a multimedia asset and to timely notify users of a status change that may impact them (Day, [0004]).
While Thomas as modified teaches monitoring content sources for selected future content items and using bookmarks for future content items, Thomas as modified doesn’t explicitly state based at least in part on the identifying, determining that at least a portion of metadata of the newly available content item corresponds to the reservation data object. However, Ratliff is in the same field of endeavor, data management, and Ratliff teaches:
based at least in part on the identifying, determining that at least a portion of metadata of the newly available content item corresponds to the reservation data object (Ratliff, [0049], note that for each new media item detected, media controllers search for bookmarks associated with the new items. While the bookmarks as taught by Ratliff are a different type of bookmark, this is still interpreted to teach identifying new items then analyzing them for associated objects. When combined with the previous references this would be for the new content items and bookmarks of Thomas for determining new content items of the bookmarks as taught by Thomas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of Ratliff because all references are directed to content management and because Ratliff would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in monitoring content which would improve content discovery and retrieval by automatically determining desired content/objects associated with new items.
Regarding Claim 2:
Thomas as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Thomas as modified further teaches:
wherein the one or more sources is selected from a list of approved sources specified by a user associated with the device (Thomas, figure 5, [0021, 0066-0069, 0071], note the user may select the source from a list of sources, e.g., approved sources).
Regarding Claim 3:
Thomas as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Thomas as modified further teaches:
obtaining a unique identifier corresponding to the newly available content item; and wherein monitoring the content availability data of the one or more sources comprises monitoring for the unique identifier (Thomas, figure 5, [0006, 0065-0067, 0082-0083, 0101], note the user may search for content items; note the content items may not be available yet, e.g., future content items; note the system may place a placeholder bookmark for content that is not yet available, e.g., reservation data object; note the system may monitor the content sources for when the future content items become available and automatically obtain, e.g., download or record, the item when it becomes available, which is interpreted as obtaining a unique identifier corresponding to the content item and monitoring for the content availability. Using the broadest reasonable, the unique identifier may be title or program ID or the like; note the interactive media guidance application may receive and display a content stream or tune to a channel providing the content to which the bookmark was directed, which means the bookmark defines a source of a content item. Additionally, in order to monitor and automatically obtain the content item when it becomes available, the reservation data must define a source to monitor and obtain the data from) (Ichioka, figures 16 and 18-21, [0187-0199], note scheduling comprises obtaining information, e.g., unique identification, for monitoring for a specific content item at a specific time. When combined with the previously cited reference, this would be for the bookmarks and sources monitored for future content as taught by Thomas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Ichioka because all references are directed to content management and because Ichioka would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in searching for and reserving content which would improve content discovery and retrieval by further defining the scheduling of the content to retrieve which facilitates and manages the automatic retrieval of desired content from multiple sources.
Regarding Claim 4:
Thomas as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Thomas as modified further teaches:
wherein the unique identifier is a combination of the unique identifier corresponding to the newly available content item with an identifier representing from which of the one or more sources the newly available content item is retrieved (Thomas, figure 5, [0006, 0065-0067, 0082-0083, 0101], note the user may search for content items; note the content items may not be available yet, e.g., future content items; note the system may place a placeholder bookmark for content that is not yet available, e.g., reservation data object; note the system may monitor the content sources for when the future content items become available and automatically obtain, e.g., download or record, the item when it becomes available, which is interpreted as obtaining a unique identifier corresponding to the content item and monitoring for the content availability. Using the broadest reasonable, the unique identifier may be title or program ID or the like; note the interactive media guidance application may receive and display a content stream or tune to a channel providing the content to which the bookmark was directed, which means the bookmark defines a source of a content item. Additionally, in order to monitor and automatically obtain the content item when it becomes available, the reservation data must define a source to monitor and obtain the data from) (Ichioka, figures 16 and 18-21, [0187-0199], note scheduling comprises obtaining information, e.g., unique identification, for monitoring for a specific content item at a specific time; note the data structures for the scheduling unit and TVContent combines the unique identifier information and source identifier information. When combined with the previously cited reference, this would be for the bookmarks and sources monitored for future content as taught by Thomas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of filing to modify the cited references to incorporate the teachings of Ichioka because all references are directed to content management and because Ichioka would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in searching for and reserving content which would improve content discovery and retrieval by further defining the scheduling of the content to retrieve which facilitates and manages the automatic retrieval of desired content from multiple sources.
Regarding Claim 6:
Thomas as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Thomas as modified further teaches:
determining that the newly available content item will be available at least at a second particular time via the one or more sources (Thomas, figure 6, [0073, 0077, 0082], note in figure 6 the content item “Jackass” has been identified to be available at two particular times via the one or more sources); and
generating, via the user interface, a prompt for user input selecting which of the one or more sources or which of the particular time or the second particular time the newly available content item is to be made accessible for playing (Thomas, figures 6 and 8, [0073, 0082], note the user is prompted for instructions on obtaining the content; note to download or order content, the user may highlight the listing associated with the program and select an "add selected program to media library" option).
Regarding Claim 7:
Thomas as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Thomas as modified further teaches:
wherein the metadata of the newly available content item comprises data other than the actor but is associated with the actor (Thomas, [0065-00670089], note the metadata comprises data other than the actor but associated with the actor such as title, ratings, program descriptions, genre, etc.).
Claim 8 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1 respectively, except claim 8 is directed to a system with input/output circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 1 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 8 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 1.
Claim 9 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 2 respectively, except claim 9 is directed to a system with input/output circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 2 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 9 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 2.
Claim 10 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 3 respectively, except claim 10 is directed to a system with input/output circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 3 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 10 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 3.
Claim 11 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 4 respectively, except claim 11 is directed to a system with input/output circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 4 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 4.
Claim 13 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 6 respectively, except claim 13 is directed to a system with input/output circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 6 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 6.
Claim 14 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 7 respectively, except claim 14 is directed to a system with input/output circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 7 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 7.
Claim 15 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 1 respectively, except claim 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium with control circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 1 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 1.
Claim 16 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 2 respectively, except claim 16 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium with control circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 2 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 16 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 2.
Claim 17 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 3 respectively, except claim 17 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium with control circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 3 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 3.
Claim 18 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 4 respectively, except claim 18 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium with control circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 4 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 4.
Claim 20 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 6 respectively, except claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium with control circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 6 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 20 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 5, 12, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas in view of Ichioka, Day, Ratliff, and Davidson (US2005/0246739, previously presented in ‘892).
Regarding Claim 5:
Thomas as modified shows the method as disclosed above;
Thomas as modified further teaches:
wherein monitoring the content availability data of the one or more sources comprises monitoring the new content availability data for the unique identifier (Thomas, figure 5, [0006, 0065-0067, 0082-0083, 0101-0102], note the user may search for content items by actor; note the user may specify the sources for the content; note the content items may not be available yet, e.g., future content items; note the system may place a placeholder bookmark for content that is not yet available, e.g., reservation data object; note the system may monitor the content sources for when the future content items become available and automatically obtain, e.g., download or record, the item when it becomes available, which means the reservation data was referenced).
While Thomas as modified teaches monitoring content availability from one or more sources, Thomas as modified doesn’t specifically state receiving periodic new content availability data. However, Davidson is in the same field of endeavor, content data management, and Davidson teaches:
wherein monitoring the content availability data of the one or more sources comprises receiving periodic new content availability data from the one or more sources and monitoring the periodic new content availability data for the unique identifier (Davidson, [0051], note receiving updated content list from each of the sources on a periodic schedule. When combined with the previously cited references this would be for the content monitoring as taught by Thomas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have incorporated the teachings of Davidson because all references are directed to content management and because Davidson would expand upon the teachings of the previously cited references in searching for and retrieving content which would improve the efficiency of content discovery and retrieval by aggregating content from multiple sources to a single point of access (Davidson, [0006-0007]).
Claim 12 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 5 respectively, except claim 12 is directed to a system with input/output circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 5 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 5.
Claim 19 discloses substantially the same limitations as claim 5 respectively, except claim 19 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium with control circuitry (Thomas, figures 1 and 2) while claim 5 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale set forth for claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Dimitrova et al. (US8528019) and Vosseller (US20070204299) teach creating wish lists to monitor content sources for future content that is not yet available.
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 JOHN J MORRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-3314. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00-2:00 PM EST.
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, James Trujillo can be reached at 571-272-3677. 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.
/JOHN J MORRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2151 4/24/2026
/James Trujillo/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2151
Prosecution Insights