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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/07/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 31 is a system claim based on all the dependent claims 32-36 but states it is a method claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11, 20-23, and 32-35 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim 1-36 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-26 of U.S. Patent No. 12,028,397. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other and are claiming common subject matter, as follows in the Table below.
Instant Application
US Patent 12,028,397
A method comprising: generating, based on a network condition and a first version of content, a second version of the content, wherein the first version of the content is associated with a first manifest; based on a comparison of an average content segment duration of a plurality of content segments of the first version of the content and an average content segment duration of a plurality of content segments of the second version of the content, generating a second manifest associated with the second version of the content to adjust the average content segment duration of the plurality of content segments of the second version of the content; and sending, to a user device, the second manifest.
1) A method comprising: determining, based on a duration of each content segment of a plurality of content segments, that an average content segment duration exceeds a first threshold; based on the average content segment duration exceeding the first threshold, determining a modified content segment duration parameter configured to cause a subsequent average content segment duration to not exceed the first threshold; and sending, to a user device, a manifest comprising the modified content segment duration parameter
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 7, 12, 19, 24, 31, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sachdev et al. (USPGPub 2017/0359628) in view of Kim et al. (USPGPub 2017/0339459).
As per claim 7, Sachdev teaches a method comprising: based on content segment duration among a plurality of content segments of content generating a manifest to adjust the content segment duration among the plurality of content segments; (Sachdev, see paragraph [0037], the manifest files may be prepared differently than for stored content. For example, for live video the manifest file may be continually updated as live video is being made available. Packager 107 provides a subset of media segments, based on the most recently encoded set of available media segments in the manifest, to origin server 106. Each manifest may include anywhere from 10 media segments up to 60 media segments (or more). Packager 107 refreshes the manifest files for every new media segment produced, which based on the media segment duration, e.g., every 2 to 4 seconds) and
sending, to a user device, the manifest (Sachdev, see paragraph [0033], generates or fetches a manifest file to send to client device).
Sachdev doesn’t explicitly teach a maximum content segment duration.
In analogous art Kim teaches maximum content segment duration (Kim, see paragraph [0061], The maxSegmentDuration attribute includes information on the maximum segment duration. In Table 1, the maximum segment duration is 4 sec).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the teaching of Kim and apply them on the teaching of Sachdev as doing so would increase the efficiency of metadata file. (Kim, see paragraph [0052]).
As per claim 12, Sachdev-Kim teaches the method of claim 7, further comprising generating the manifest based on a manifest template. (Sachdev, see paragraph [0047], Manifest manipulator 102 may be deployed on a server side and is responsible for alternate content insertion within the manifest (e.g., the variant playlist). Further, manifest manipulator 102 may retrieve and insert a metadata payload into the manifest. This service is deployed on a server side with origin server 106 and communicates with metadata payload entities 108, such as an ad server, the manifest, the manifest service, or the client device, using protocols like Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) and Video Ad Serving Template (VAST) to retrieve the ABR content).
As per claim 19,
[Rejection rational for claim 7 is applicable].
As per claim 24, Sachdev-Kim teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 19, wherein the processor-executable instructions further cause the at least one processor to generate the manifest based on a manifest template (Sachdev, see paragraph [0047], Manifest manipulator 102 may be deployed on a server side and is responsible for alternate content insertion within the manifest (e.g., the variant playlist). Further, manifest manipulator 102 may retrieve and insert a metadata payload into the manifest. This service is deployed on a server side with origin server 106 and communicates with metadata payload entities 108, such as an ad server, the manifest, the manifest service, or the client device, using protocols like Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) and Video Ad Serving Template (VAST) to retrieve the ABR content).
As per claim 31,
[Rejection rational for claim 7 is applicable].
As per claim 36, Sachdev-Kim teaches the system of claim 32, wherein the computing device is further configured to generate the manifest based on a manifest template (Sachdev, see paragraph [0047], Manifest manipulator 102 may be deployed on a server side and is responsible for alternate content insertion within the manifest (e.g., the variant playlist). Further, manifest manipulator 102 may retrieve and insert a metadata payload into the manifest. This service is deployed on a server side with origin server 106 and communicates with metadata payload entities 108, such as an ad server, the manifest, the manifest service, or the client device, using protocols like Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) and Video Ad Serving Template (VAST) to retrieve the ABR content).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HERMON ASRES whose telephone number is (571)272-4257. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM to 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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached at (571)272-7304. 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.
/HERMON ASRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights