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 .
Claims Status
Claims 16-35 are currently pending in the application.
Claims 27-35 are new claims.
Claims 1-15 has been cancelled.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,875,209 B2 to Jacobs in view of US 2012/0072608 A1 to Peters et al.
As to claim 16, Jacobs discloses a computerized method for automating a content ingest workflow (see fig.5-6), comprising: determining a new asset package has arrived and transfer has completed (see col.12,ll.49-52); parsing a data structure of the new asset package to identify metadata; unpacking a tar file associated with the new asset package, the tar file containing file variants (see fig.6; col.13,ll.6-7 and ll.18-21); and publishing at least a portion of the metadata to a content management system(see fig.6; col.13,ll.19-30).
Jacobs fails explicitly discloses ABR file and publishing the ABR file variants to an origin server apparatus.
Peters discloses ABR file and publishing the ABR file variants to an origin server apparatus (see page.3,¶0036,¶0041).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs with the teaching as taught by Peters in order to dynamically adjusted to provide a higher or lower bitrate as conditions change when streaming the content.
As to claim 17, Jacobs further discloses validating a checksum for each of the file variants (see fig.7; col.13,ll.31-32,ll.57-60).
As to claim 18, Jacobs further discloses wherein the determining that the transfer has completed comprises detecting delivery of an XML (Extensible Markup Language) file last, thereby indicating that transfer of the new asset package has completed (see fig.6; col.13,ll.15-18).
As to claim 19, Jacobs further discloses wherein the parsing of the data structure of the new asset package to identify metadata comprises parsing the data structure of the new asset package to identify marketing metadata and technical metadata (see col.13,ll.15-21).
As to claim 20, Jacobs further discloses wherein the publishing of the at least portion of the metadata to the content management system comprises utilizing an object storage service to store XML (Extensible Markup Language) data associated with the new asset package as objects within buckets (see col.13,ll.15-21).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,875,209 B2 to Jacobs in view of US 2012/0072608 A1 to Peters et al, and further in view of US 2016/0014439 A1 to Friedrich et al.
As to claim 21, Jacobs and Peters fail discloses utilizing a just-in-time (JIT) packaging to save one or more assets associated with the new asset package in storage as a single transport stream file until they are packaged at a time of request for streaming.
Friedrich discloses utilizing a just-in-time (JIT) packaging to save one or more assets associated with the new asset package in storage as a single transport stream file until they are packaged at a time of request for streaming (see page.1,¶0015).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs and Peters with the teaching as taught by Friedrich in order to delivering package on demand and/or real time thereby eliminating the need to storage inventory until is needed.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,875,209 B2 to Jacobs in view of US 2012/0072608 A1 to Peters et al, and further in view of US 2008/0209491 A1 to Hasek.
As to claim 22, Jacobs and Peters fail explicitly discloses receiving client device data; based on the client device data, determining that an authenticated client device registered to a first subscriber account is located at a subscriber location associated with a second subscriber account associated with a second subscriber; and without receiving additional client device input, reregistering the authenticated client device to the second subscriber account such that the authenticated client device may be provided with respective subscriber account authorized services at the subscriber location associated with the second subscriber.
Hasek discloses receiving client device data; based on the client device data, determining that an authenticated client device registered to a first subscriber account is located at a subscriber location associated with a second subscriber account associated with a second subscriber; and without receiving additional client device input, reregistering the authenticated client device to the second subscriber account such that the authenticated client device may be provided with respective subscriber account authorized (see fig.2b; page.3,¶0233-¶237).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs and Peters with the teaching as taught by Hasek in order to provide a content to subscriber from different location by automatically recognizing the user location and matching the subscriber account.
Claims 23-25, 27-30 and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,875,209 B2 to Jacobs in view of US 2013/0275443 A1 to Meijer et al.
As to claim 23, Jacobs discloses a computerized apparatus, comprising: digital processor apparatus; wireless interface apparatus; and storage apparatus in data communication with the digital processor apparatus and comprising a storage medium, the storage medium comprising at least one computer program, the at least one computer program, configured to, when executed on the digital processor apparatus (see fig.2 and 5), cause the computerized apparatus to: based on the detection, initiate an asset ingest process to ingest a content asset package (see fig.6; col.13,ll.11-18); unpack one or more files containing asset variants within the content asset package (see fig.6; col.13,ll.18-23); publish the asset variants to a server apparatus of a content distribution network (see fig.6; col.13,ll.24-32); and report that the asset ingest process is complete to a content management entity, thereby causing a content asset associated with the content asset package to be made available and streamable (see fig.6; col.13,ll.45-49).
Jacobs fails discloses monitor a storage location to detect data representative of a terminating file.
Meijer discloses monitor a storage location to detect data representative of a terminating file (see page.2,¶0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs with the teaching as taught by Meijer in order to automatically retrieve content utilizing watch folders and/or feed readers from the location.
As to claim 24, Jacobs further discloses wherein: the data representative of the terminating file comprises an XML (Extensible Markup Language) file comprising metadata; and the at least one computer program, configured to, when executed on the digital processor apparatus, cause the computerized apparatus to: publish the XML file to the content management entity (see col.13,ll.15-21).
As to claim 25, Jacobs further discloses wherein the asset variants comprise two or more asset variants (see col.13,ll.24-30).
As to claim 27, Jacobs discloses a computer readable apparatus comprising a non-transitory storage medium, the non-transitory storage medium comprising at least one computer program having a plurality of instructions configured to, when executed on a digital processing apparatus of a content delivery system, cause the content delivery system to: based on detection of the arrival, initiate a staged ingest workflow comprising analysis of the at least one metadata file to identify a prescribed ingest sequence applicable to at least one of the plurality of asset files (see col.13,ll.8-14); based at least on the prescribed ingest sequence, coordinate retrieval of the plurality of asset files from the content package via at least one network-attached storage interface (see col.13,ll.15-23); and publish, to at least one origin server apparatus, a set of ingest results comprising variant- level asset information generated during execution of the staged ingest workflow (see col.13,ll.24-34).
Jacobs fails explicitly discloses monitor a designated storage location to detect arrival of a content package comprising a plurality of asset files and at least one metadata file.
Meijer discloses monitor a designated storage location to detect arrival of a content package comprising a plurality of asset files and at least one metadata file (see page.2,¶0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs with the teaching as taught by Meijer in order to automatically retrieve content utilizing watch folders and/or feed readers from the location.
As to claim 28, Jacobs further discloses wherein the at least one metadata file comprises a manifest identifying an order of precedence among the plurality of asset files, and wherein the staged ingest workflow comprises validating compliance of the plurality of asset files with the order of precedence (see col.13,ll.24-32).
As to claim 29, Jacobs further discloses wherein the prescribed ingest sequence comprises a plurality of ingest phases including an initial metadata verification phase, a variant extraction phase, and an origin publishing phase (see fig.6, el.612,620,638; col.13,ll.8-10, ll.18-23, ll.47-49).
As to claim 30, Jacobs further discloses wherein the plurality of instructions are further configured to, when executed on the digital processing apparatus, cause the content delivery system to: generate an ingest-state data structure maintaining a record of progress for each of the plurality of ingest phases; an propagate the ingest-state data structure to a content management system (see fig.6, el.612,620,638; col.13,ll.8-10, ll.18-23, ll.47-49).
As to claim 33, Jacobs further discloses wherein the published set of ingest results comprise: hash values corresponding to at least some of the plurality of asset files; and status indications of respective validation operations performed on the plurality of asset files (see col.13,ll.8-10 and col.13,ll.57-60).
As to claim 34, Jacobs further discloses wherein the prescribed ingest sequence is determined based at least on one or more attributes of the content package selected from the group consisting of: package type, package size, asset class, or codec type (see col.13,ll.18-23).
Claims 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,875,209 B2 to Jacobs in view of US 2013/0275443 A1 to Meijer et al, and further in view of US 2012/0072608 A1 to Peters et al.
As to claim 31, Jacobs and Meijer fail explicitly discloses wherein the plurality of instructions are further configured to, when executed on the digital processing apparatus, cause the content delivery system to perform a recovery workflow comprising detecting interruption of at least one ingest phase; and automatically resuming the at least one ingest phase at a point of last-known successful progress as indicated by the ingest-state data structure.
Peters discloses wherein the plurality of instructions are further configured to, when executed on the digital processing apparatus, cause the content delivery system to perform a recovery workflow comprising detecting interruption of at least one ingest phase; and automatically resuming the at least one ingest phase at a point of last-known successful progress as indicated by the ingest-state data structure (see fig.6;page.2,¶0013,¶0071).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs and Meijer with the teaching as taught by Peters in order to enhanced content streaming system improves the user experience by providing zero configuration failover that occurs without interrupting the user experience.
As to claim 32, Peters further discloses wherein coordinating retrieval of the plurality of asset files comprises: detecting a set of adjustable bitrate (ABR) variants within the content package; and assigning respective ingest tasks to a plurality of worker nodes, each worker node configured to validate one of the ABR variants (see page.3,¶0036,¶0041).
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,875,209 B2 to Jacobs in view of US 2013/0275443 A1 to Meijer et al, and further in view of US 2015/0067722 A1 to Bjordammen et al.
As to claim 35, Jacobs and Meijer fail explicitly discloses wherein publication of the set of ingest results comprises: transmitting, via an API of an origin server apparatus, a set of variant-level descriptors configured to enable just-in-time packaging of corresponding variants.
Bjordammen discloses wherein publication of the set of ingest results comprises: transmitting, via an API of an origin server apparatus, a set of variant level descriptors configured to enable just-in-time packaging of corresponding variants(see page.3,¶0032,¶0034-¶0035).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs and Meijer with the teaching as taught by Bjordammen in order to satisfy a specific client session based on that request in real time in response to an individual client request.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,875,209 B2 to Jacobs in view of US 2013/0275443 A1 to Meijer et al, and further in view of US 2008/0209491 A1 to Hasek.
As to claim 26, Jacobs and Meijer fail explicitly discloses wherein the at least one computer program, configured to, when executed on the digital processor apparatus, cause the computerized apparatus to: receive client device data; determine that an authenticated client device registered to a first subscriber account is located at a subscriber location associated with a second subscriber account associated with a second subscriber; and without receiving additional client device input, cause reregistration of the authenticated client device to the second subscriber account such that the authenticated client device may be provided with respective subscriber account authorized services at the subscriber location associated with the second subscriber.
Hasek discloses wherein the at least one computer program, configured to, when executed on the digital processor apparatus, cause the computerized apparatus to: receive client device data; determine that an authenticated client device registered to a first subscriber account is located at a subscriber location associated with a second subscriber account associated with a second subscriber; and without receiving additional client device input, cause reregistration of the authenticated client device to the second subscriber account such that the authenticated client device may be provided with respective subscriber account authorized services at the subscriber location associated with the second subscriber (see fig.2b; page.3,¶0233-¶237).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jacobs and Peters with the teaching as taught by Hasek in order to provide a content to subscriber from different location by automatically recognizing the user location and matching the subscriber account.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MULUGETA MENGESHA whose telephone number is (469)295-9212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:30PM ET.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
MULUGETA MENGESHA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2424
/Mulugeta Mengesha/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424