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 allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). 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, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 20 May 2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 20 May 2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Claims 1, 3, 11, and 13 have been amended.
Claims 1, 3-7, 9-11, 13-17, and 19-20 are presently pending.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-7, 9-11, 14-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2003/0162493 A1) (of record, hereinafter Kim), further in view of Sato et al. (US 2003/0181198 A1) (of record, hereinafter Sato), and further in view of Handelman et al. (US 6,312,336 B1) (of record, hereinafter Handelman), and further in view of Umemura et al. (US 2005/0021810 A1) (of record, hereinafter Umemura).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a method for displaying media guidance information, [Figs. 2, 5A-B] the method comprising:
after reception of media guidance information with a first electronic device: [Figs. 2-5; 0018- 21, 0043-46: receiving device may receive broadcast signals and retrieve included guide information, and subsequently stores the data]
causing to be transmitted at least some of the media guidance information to control circuitry coupled with a display; [Figs. 2-5; 0031, 0047: when EPG data is requested, controller 409 causes stored guide information to be output to graphics engine 411 to cause display of guide information]
causing to be displayed the at least some of the media guidance information on the display while simultaneously generating for display on the display media content, [Figs. 2-5; 0031-33, 0047-49: when EPG data is requested, controller 409 causes stored guide information to be output to graphics engine 411 to cause display of guide information concurrently with a currently provided channel/content (e.g., Fig. 3A)]
wherein the media content for the game is received by the control circuitry from a source other than the first electronic device, [Figs. 2-5; 0031-33, 0047-49: when EPG data is requested, controller 409 causes stored guide information to be output to graphics engine 411 to cause display of guide information from storage unit 408/413 concurrently with a currently provided channel/content from broadcast source)] and
wherein the causing to be displayed does not interrupt the generating for display of the media content received by the control circuitry from the source other than the first electronic device; [Fig. 3A; 0010, 0063: guide information displayed partially overlapping program currently being watched thereby substantially preventing interruption of the currently watched program/content] and
performing a media guidance function with the media guidance information while the media guidance information is displayed, wherein the performing causes the media guidance information to be modified. [Figs. 5A-B; 0054-60: where various control functions may be performed with respect to the displayed media guide]
Kim fails to explicitly disclose a first portable electronic device. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitation not explicitly disclosed by Kim).
Sato, in analogous art, teaches a first portable electronic device. [Sato – Figs. 1-3, 10-15; 0030: portable information terminal 12 may be a mobile TV receiver; 0070-72: where portable information terminal may receive SI information to provide EPG functionality]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the method of Kim with the teachings of Sato to specify a portable electronic device as it would be understood that a television receiver capable of receiving and displaying both video content and media guide content may be embodied as a mobile/portable TV receiver to provide users greater freedom of control and handling. [Sato – 0010, 0030]
Kim and Sato fail to explicitly disclose the media content for a game during a play session of the game. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitation not explicitly disclosed by Kim and Sato).
Handelman, in analogous art, teaches the media content for a game during a play session of the game. [Fig. 1; col.1, line 64 – col. 2, line 8; col. 5, lines 36-44; col. 11, line 43 – col. 12, line 13: entertainment systems may provide gaming systems via broadcast/TV services (such as the portable receivers of Kim and Sato above)]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the method of Kim and Sato with the teachings of Handelman to specify the media content being a play session of a game as it is readily understood that television systems (such as those of Kim and Sato) may also provide gaming services across a variety of networks. [Handelman – ABST; col. 1, lines 36-57]
Kim, Sat, and Handelman fail to explicitly disclose causing to be displayed the modified media guidance information on the first portable device.
Umemura, in analogous art, causing to be displayed the modified media guidance information on the first portable device. [Figs. 5-6; 0042-48: user using portable terminal (such as portable device of Kim, Sato, and Handelman above) may connect with PC/TV and once session is established screen of portable terminal is presented on both the portable device and TV]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the method of Kim, Sato, and Handelman with the teachings of Umemura to cause display of the media guidance information on the first portable device as it is understood content of a mobile terminal may simultaneously present an interface (such as the media guidance application of Kim, Sato, and Handelman) and transmit said interface to a larger PC/TV so as to be able to operate the mobile terminal while seeing the screen on a larger and wider screen. [Umemura – 0044, 0047]
Regarding Claim 4, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Kim discloses wherein the media guidance information comprises at least one of a device setting, a play position, a media listing, playlist information, and user profile information. [Kim – Fig. 3; 0031: EPG data of other programs in area 211 and/or highlighted/recommend programs in area 213]
Regarding Claim 5, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Kim discloses wherein the media guidance function comprises at least one of entering information, navigating a media content list, searching for media content, controlling media content, or modifying an audio output setting. [Kim – Figs. 3, 5; 0031: EPG data of other programs in area 211 and/or highlighted/recommend programs in area 213; 0032-33: user may use keys to navigate the guide data and/or search for/select media]
Regarding Claim 6, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Kim and Handelman disclose wherein the media guidance function comprises at least one of scheduling media content for recording, recording media content, deleting media content, adding media content to a list, setting a reminder for media content, or receiving media content via an on-demand service. [Kim – Fig. 3B: ‘Record’ button; Handelman – Fig. 2C; col. 11, lines 3-17: wherein program guides may include menus to allow for setting video recordings]
Regarding Claim 7, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Kim discloses wherein causing to be displayed the at least some of the media guidance information on the display while simultaneously generating for display on the display media content for the game during the play session of the game comprises: causing to be displayed the at least some of the media guidance information in a portion of the display that overlays the media content for the game, without interrupting the play session of the game. [Fig. 3A; 0010, 0063: guide information displayed partially overlapping program currently being watched thereby substantially preventing interruption of the currently watched program/content]
Regarding Claim 9, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Kim and Sato disclose in response to performing the media guidance function, causing an audio output to be modified for a speaker coupled to the control circuitry. [Kim – Fig. 4; 0040-41: received audio content may be processed and output via a speaker as controlled by controller 409; Sato – 0086: user operation may be used to perform audio volume control]
Regarding Claim 10, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Kim and Handelman disclose wherein the media guidance information comprises at least one of a name or other ID for a user associated with the portable device, a media content listing, a list of favorite media content, or a list of recorded media content. [Kim – Fig. 3; 0031: EPG data of other programs in area 211 and/or highlighted/recommend programs in area 213; Handelman – Figs. 2A – media that is currently in memory (i.e., recorded)]
Regarding Claim 11, Claim 11 recites a system that performs the functions of the method of Claim 1. As such, Claim 11 is analyzed and rejected similarly as Claim 1, mutatis mutandis.
Regarding Claim 14, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 11 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 11 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 4 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Regarding Claim 15, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 11 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 15 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 5 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Regarding Claim 16, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 11 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 16 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 6 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Regarding Claim 17, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 11 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 17 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 7 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Regarding Claim 19, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 11 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 19 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 9 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Regarding Claim 20, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 11 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 20 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 10 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura as applied to claims 1 and 11, respectively, above, and further in view of Sevat (US 2001/0006382 A1) (of record, hereinafter Sevat).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 1 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Umemura discloses causing to be display the modified media guidance information on the first portable device comprises establishing a communication link between the control circuitry and the first portable device [Umemura – Figs. 4-5; 0043-48: portable terminal may communicate and establish a communication session with a PC/TV, and once established may present portable terminal screen on both portable terminal and the PC/TV]
Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura fail to explicitly disclose establishing a communication link between the control circuitry and the first portable device based on an identity of a user associated with the first portable device. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitation not explicitly disclosed by Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura).
Sevat, in analogous art, teaches establishing a communication link between the control circuitry and the first portable device based on an identity of a user associated with the first portable device. [Figs. 1-3; ABST; 0004-6, 0011, 0019-21, 0025-27: wherein a single display device may be divided in a split screen manner such that the display is divided into multiple windows that may each be independently controlled/associated with the number of remote controls; 0006, 0009, 0019-22: each window of the plurality of split-screen windows is uniquely identified and associated with a unique remote control identifier (wherein each remote control is associated with a given user)]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the system of Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura with the teachings of Sevat to establish communication links based on identity of users associated with the portable device in order to enable multiple users of a display system to independently control a window displayed on the shared display device and so that users may know which area of the screen they control. [Sevat – ABST; 0004-11]
Regarding Claim 13, Kim, Sato, Handelman, and Umemura disclose all of the limitations of Claim 11 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Claim 13 recites nearly identical limitations as Claim 3 and is rejected similarly as that claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2767. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am - 5:30pm.
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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at (571) 270-3618. 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.
/WILLIAM J KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Prosecution Insights