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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply in view of newly found reference Krishna being used in the current rejection. See the new rejection below.
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.
Claims 1-5, 9, and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG Pub 2021/0329351 to GIladi (“Giladi”) in view of US PG Pub 2019/0306519 to Chen (“Chen”) and US Patent 9,270,721 to Krishna (“Krishna”).
Regarding claim 1, “A media delivery method” reads on the method/system for managing content (abstract) disclosed by Giladi and represented in Fig. 1.
As to “comprising: providing, at a streaming server, a media content to a streaming client, wherein the media content comprises a plurality of media tracks” Giladi discloses (¶0036, ¶0056) that the user device receives media content from the content service where the content service is implemented as one or more servers; (¶0020, ¶0041) the content includes content streams, content files, content segments etc. where content segments is stored as a complete track.
As to “specifying, at the streaming server, a first group of entities for the media content, wherein each entity in the first group of entities is a media track, an item, a track group, or a child group of entities” Giladi discloses (¶0021, ¶0024, ¶0026) that the system generate a plurality of content segments by subdividing the content where the unique identifier is used to uniquely identify a determined set of content information; (¶0030) the content information comprises unique ID for the MPD to identify content segments associated with different presentations.
As to “populating, at the streaming server, a first data structure that specifies one or more arrays of entity identifiers for the first group of entities, each array of entity identifiers comprising one or more identifiers of the entities in the first group” GIladi discloses (¶0026-¶0028) that the unique identifier is used to uniquely identify a determined set of content information (e.g., for generating a manifest file based on the set of content information); the unique identifier may be a separate identifier than the manifest identifier, the encoding identifier, the content set identifier, or the period identifier. Multiple unique identifiers may be used, such as at least two of the manifest identifier, the encoding identifier, the content set identifier, or the period identifier; the system may be configured use at least a unique identifier for a collection of content segments associated with a representation; (¶0028) the system is configured the add the content information by adding one or more identifiers to one of more of the plurality of content segments; the one or more identifiers may comprise one or more of the unique identifier, the manifest identifier, the period identifier, the content set identifier, or the encoding set identifier; (¶0033) the content information comprises identifiers (e.g., a list, array) of all related representations; (¶0085, ¶0087) generating the manifest file comprises adding, to the manifest file, data structure elements logically organizing the plurality of content segments for playback.
As to “wherein each array of entity identifiers is associated with one reference type that indicates…the entities identified by the array of entity identifiers; and providing the first data structures to the streaming client” Giladi discloses (¶0076, ¶0084, claim 1) that the plurality of identifiers indicates different types of media presentation description fields (e.g., manifest fields) associated with playback of the content asset; (¶0060) the generated manifest file is provided to the user device which configures a user device to playout the content segments; (¶0004, ¶0079) the identifiers are used to determine a logical structure of the manifest file where the identifiers are used to determine which subsets of the plurality of content segments are associated with corresponding data structure elements (e.g., manifest data structure elements/group type), such as period elements (e.g., indicating scenes, ads), adaptation set elements (e.g., indicating video tracks, audio tracks), representation elements (e.g., indicating a specific encoding with a specific resolution, size, bandwidth); the data structure elements are interpreted as group types that are added to a shell manifest file to generate the manifest file for the plurality of content assets; (¶0026, ¶0030) the system uses a unique identifier for a collection of content segments associated with a representation; (¶0033, ¶0069-¶0071, ¶0094) content asset may be encoded into a first plurality of content segments for a first representation (e.g., 1080p resolution) and a second plurality of content segments for a second representation (e.g., 720p resolution) (e.g., as shown in FIG. 2). The initialization content segment for the first representation may comprise a first identifier (e.g., representation identifier) indicating the first representation.
Giladi meets all the limitations of the claim except “wherein the first data structure is signaled in a timed metadata track without modifying the plurality of media tracks, and the timed metadata track is a track separated from the plurality of media tracks.” However, Chen discloses (¶0099) that the timed metadata tracked specified in ISOBMFF is used to carry the composition metadata where the timed metadata in tracks are different from the media tracks themselves; (claim 1) the device receives multimedia data with multiple tracks where the timed metadata track is used for the media track; (¶0101) using timed metadata tracks to provide composition metadata, provides more flexibility than existing techniques; the techniques can provide composition metadata without modifying the content of (e.g., primary and/or secondary) media tracks. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Giladi’s system by using a separate timed metadata track without modifying the media tracks as taught by Chen in order to associate the timed metadata with the media track content (Chen - ¶0004).
Combination of Giladi and Chen meets all the limitations of the claim except “one reference type indicates a presentation relationship among the entities…” However, Krishna discloses (4:34-50; 5:25-35) the technique for switching between adaptation sets during playback of media data, where during streaming, a user wishes to switch languages for audio/subtitles, etc. and the client device having already retrieved a certain amount of media data from a first adaptation set, switches to a second, different adaptation set; (5:65-6:3; 16:27-39; claim 5) manifest defines which representations belong to the same adaptation sets and are switchable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Giladi and Chen’s systems by using reference type indicating a presentation relationship among the entities as taught by Krishna in order to allow a user to switch the adaptation set to enjoy a more pleasant experience, e.g., due to an uninterrupted playback experience (Krishna – 4:58-60).
Regarding claim 2, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein different arrays of entity identifiers of the first group correspond to different reference types” Giladi discloses (¶0076, ¶0084) that the plurality of identifiers indicate different types of media presentation description fields (e.g., manifest fields) associated with playback of the content asset.
Regarding claim 3, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein a first array of entity identifiers comprises identifiers for tracks, items, or groups of entities” Giladi discloses (¶0026) that the unique identifier is used to uniquely identify a determined set of content information (e.g., for generating a manifest file based on the set of content information). The unique identifier may comprise any of the identifiers described herein, such as the manifest identifier, the encoding identifier, the content set identifier, or the period identifier; (¶0028) The ingest service may be configured the add the content information by adding one or more identifiers to one of more of the plurality of content segments; the one or more identifiers may comprise one or more of the unique identifier, the manifest identifier, the period identifier, the content set identifier, or the encoding set identifier.
Regarding claim 4, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein the first group of entities is a preselection specified by a Media Presentation Description (MPD)” Giladi discloses (¶0030) that the content information comprises globally unique identifier for the MPD to identify content segments associated with different presentations; (¶0079) for each of the one or more unique identifiers, a list of content segments, of the plurality of content segments, that are associated with the corresponding unique identifier may be determined; one or more data structure elements may be determined based on the list of content segments; the data structure elements may be data structure elements (e.g., or fields, tags) of a media presentation description.
Regarding claim 5, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein a first reference type for a first array of entity identifiers of the first group indicates that track and track group switching is allowed during playback of the media content” Krishna discloses (4:34-50; 5:25-35) the technique for switching between adaptation sets during playback of media data, where during streaming, a user wishes to switch languages for audio/subtitles, etc. and the client device having already retrieved a certain amount of media data from a first adaptation set, switches to a second, different adaptation set; (5:65-6:3; 16:27-39; claim 5) manifest defines which representations belong to the same adaptation sets and are switchable.
Regarding claim 9, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein the second data structure comprises a plurality of boxes that correspond to the plurality of groups of entities, wherein a box that corresponds to the first group of entities refers to the first data structure” Giladi discloses (¶0033, ¶0069-¶0071, ¶0094) content asset may be encoded into a first plurality of content segments for a first representation (e.g., 1080p resolution) and a second plurality of content segments for a second representation (e.g., 720p resolution) (e.g., as shown in FIG. 2). The initialization content segment for the first representation may comprise a first identifier (e.g., representation identifier) indicating the first representation and a second identifier indicating the second representation.
Regarding claim 12, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein the media content is segmented for the transmission to the streaming client” GIladi discloses (¶0028) that the system is configured the add the content information by adding one or more identifiers to one of more of the plurality of content segments; the one or more identifiers may comprise one or more of the unique identifier, the manifest identifier, the period identifier, the content set identifier, or the encoding set identifier; (¶0033) the content information comprises identifiers (e.g., a list, array) of all related representations; (¶0085, ¶0087) generating the manifest file comprises adding, to the manifest file, data structure elements logically organizing the plurality of content segments for playback.
Regarding claim 13, see rejection similar to claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, see rejection similar to claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, see rejection similar to claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein the presentation relationship is for governing playback behavior among the entities identified by the array of entity identifiers” Krishna discloses (4:34-50; 5:25-35) the technique for switching between adaptation sets during playback of media data, where during streaming, a user wishes to switch languages for audio/subtitles, etc. and the client device having already retrieved a certain amount of media data from a first adaptation set, switches to a second, different adaptation set; (5:65-6:3; 16:27-39; claim 5) manifest defines which representations belong to the same adaptation sets and are switchable.
Regarding claim 17, see rejection similar to claim 16.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giladi in view of Chen and Krishna as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US PG Pub 2021/0274241 to Cava (“Cava”).
Regarding claim 6, combination of Giladi, Chen, and Krishna meets all the limitations of the claim except “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein a first reference type for a first array of entity identifiers of the first group indicates that track and track group preselection is allowed only before playback and not during playback of the media content” Cava discloses (¶0021, ¶0042) that during the live streaming, the client resolves opportunities before reaching the opportunities to receive supplement content; (¶0100) the media player is allowed to switch bitrates/content sources on a segment-by-segment basis. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Giladi, Chen, and Krishna’s systems by using reference type indicating track group preselection is allowed only before playback as taught by Cava in order to compensate for network bandwidth variances and also infrastructure failures that may occur during playback of the video (Cava - ¶0100).
Regarding claim 7, “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein a first reference type of a first array of entity identifiers of the first group indicates that tracks, track groups and members of a child entity group are to be played back together” Cava discloses (¶0097) that the audio-video data is distributed to remote client devices over the network; the content server streams audio-video data continuously to a media player operating on the client device which plays the audio-video data concurrently with receiving the streaming data from the server.
Furthermore, the Examiner takes the position that claim 7 is meant to further narrow claim 1. The limitation is optional and not positively required since the preceding limitation of claim 1 (each entity in the first group of entities is a media track, an item, a track group, or a child group of entities) requires to find only one of the four elements.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giladi in view of Chen and Krishna as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US PG Pub 2022/0337898 to Dorogusker (“Dorogusker”).
Regarding claim 10, combination of Giladi, Chen, and Krishna meets all the limitations of the claim except “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein the group type specified for the first group of entities indicate that members of the first group of entities are to be played back together.” However, Dorogusker discloses (¶0065) that the host computing device transmits the live media stream and the playback control channel to the collaboration component which relays the live media stream and the playback control channel to the audience member client devices; the audience member client devices then playback the media content as instructed by the playback control channel and play the live media stream at the same time as instructed by the encoded markers in the playback control channel. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Giladi, Chen, and Krishna’s systems by indicating that members of the group of entity playback content together as taught by Dorogusker so this way the audience member client devices are responsible for combining the media content that are played back with the live media stream (Dorogusker - ¶0065).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giladi in view of Chen and Krishna as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent 9,807,142 to Frojdh (“Frojdh”).
Regarding claim 11, combination of Giladi, Chen, and Krishna meets all the limitations of the claim except “The media delivery method of claim 1, wherein the group type specified for the first group of entities includes unspecified, indicating that a presentation relationship among the members is not defined for playback.” However, Frojdh discloses (8:1-34) that the track includes samples of different temporal levels that provide different rates by allowing samples of one temporal level to be used independently of samples of lower temporal levels, the flexibility regarding the number of possible rates is increased and more alternative rates can be provided to achieve trick modes; the information indicating whether the temporal levels can be decoded independently without using samples from the groups of lower temporal levels can also be useful when only I frames are used to accomplish the trick modes. The I frames are divided into different temporal levels, e.g. every other I frame is on temporary level 1 and every other I frame is on temporal level 2. Since the I frames are not dependent on any other frames, the information according to the embodiments of the present invention indicating whether the temporal levels can be decoded independently without using samples from the groups of lower temporal levels temporal levels can be used to select a group of I frames for accomplishing a trick mode to provide a certain rate. Thus, although there is no dependence between the I frames the parameter originally intended for indicating dependence between temporal levels can be used for indicating that only a part of the I frames should be used which increases the flexibility. Based on this teaching, it is obvious that the flexible grouping is used where the relationship is not defined. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Giladi, Chen, and Krishna’s systems by specifying group type relationship as unspecified among the members as taught by Chen in order to allow flexible playback arrangements of the tracks.
Conclusion
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 PINKAL R CHOKSHI whose telephone number is (571)270-3317. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BRIAN T PENDLETON can be reached at (571)272-7527. 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.
/PINKAL R CHOKSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights